natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Vsekakor je mogoče ugotoviti, da je postopek konkurenčnega dialoga za oddajo javnih naročil na področju javno-zasebnih partnerstev načeloma prednosten, ker združuje prednosti zaprtega postopka in prednosti postopka s pogajanji.
At any event it may be said that the competitive dialogue procedure deserves to take preference for the award of contracts in the PPP sector as a principle because it combines the advantages of the restricted procedure with those of the negotiated procedure.
Zaradi prilagodljivosti omogoča optimalne rešitve pod velikim pritiskom konkurence.
Its flexible nature enables it to obtain optimum solutions under great competitive pressure.
Zato se zmanjša nevarnost nekonkurenčnega ravnanja.
This reduces the risk of anti-competitive behaviour.
Da bi zagotovili lažjo uporabo postopka, mora Komisija podrobno opredeliti pojem „pravne in finančne zapletenosti“.
To make the procedure easier to apply the Commission should spell out what is meant by ‘legal and financial complexity’.
Javno-zasebna partnerstva kot koncesije
PPPs as concessions
Ena od glavnih točk sedanje razprave o javno-zasebnih partnerstvih je povezana z vprašanjem, ali je treba za koncesije storitev vzpostaviti ureditev za celotno Skupnost in, če jo je treba, ali mora biti ta ureditev ločena od javnih naročil ali združena z njimi.
One of the main points in the current debate about PPPs turns on the issue of whether service concessions should be regulated on a Community-wide basis, and if so, whether such regulation should be separate or combined with public contracts.
Pred nekaj leti je Komisija objavila razlagalno sporočilo Komisije o koncesijah v zakonodaji Skupnosti in o javnih naročilih.
A few years ago the Commission issued an ‘Interpretative Communication on Concessions Under Community Law’.
Na podlagi rezultatov posvetovanja je Komisija sklenila, da najprej izvede presojo vplivov, preden odloči, ali bo objavila še eno razlagalno sporočilo ali predlog direktive.
In the light of the results of this consultation the Commission decided first to evaluate the implications, before determining whether to publish a further interpretive Communication or a proposed directive.
To ravnanje je treba pozdraviti.
This approach should be welcomed.
Dejstvo, da na tem področju ne obstaja obveznost usklajevanja zakonodaje in da je le nekaj držav članic pripravljenih določiti ureditev za koncesije storitev, je v nasprotju z odprtjem zadevnih trgov v celotni Skupnosti.
The fact that there is no obligation in this area to coordinate the law, and the further fact that very few Member States want to lay down rules for service concessions, stand in the way of a Community-wide move to open up the markets concerned.
Takšne okoliščine ogrožajo konkurenco in tudi povzročajo pravno negotovost.
This situation not only runs the risk of a loss of competition but also leads to legal uncertainties.
Ta nastane zlasti zaradi težav v zvezi z razmejitvijo, ker je pri zapletenih projektih javno-zasebnih partnerstev včasih težko ugotoviti, ali gre za koncesijo storitev ali za naročilo storitev.
The latter arise primarily from difficulties with demarcation, because in the case of complex PPP projects it is not always easy to identify them as a service concession or a service contract.
Zato je prednost zakonske ureditve postopka dodeljevanja za koncesije s tem povezana pravna varnost v celotni Skupnosti.
The crucial advantage of legislative regulation of the procurement procedure for concessions lies in the consequent Europe-wide legal certainty.
Pravna varnost pa pomeni varnost naložb, ki spet pozitivno vplivajo na konkurenco.
And legal certainty means investment security, which in turn has a positive impact on competition.
Zakonska ureditev za koncesije mora določiti dejanski postopek dodeljevanja, ki upošteva posebnosti te pravne oblike.
Legislation on concessions should set out a practical procurement procedure that takes account of the special features of that legal form.
Takšna ureditev bi jasno določila, da organi oblasti ne morejo dodeliti podjetju koncesije brez konkurenčnega izbirnega postopka.
It would make clear that local authorities cannot award a concession to an undertaking without a competitive tendering procedure.
Zaradi takšne konkurence se praviloma znižajo cene – popolnoma s stališča davkoplačevalcev – kakovost storitve pa ostane enaka ali se celo poveča.
As a rule competition of this kind leads – wholly in the taxpayers’ interest – to lower prices for the same or even better quality of service.
Dokler ne bo izpolnjena zahteva po zakonski ureditvi, je možno, da se lahko koncesije storitev uporabljajo zato, da se udeleženci izognejo zakonodaji o javnih naročilih.
But for as long as the need for legislation is unfulfilled the suspicion must remain that service concessions serve as a way of evading the law on public contracts.
Institucionalizirana javno-zasebna partnerstva in interni odnosi
Institutionalised PPPs (IPPPs) and ‘in-house relations’
Institucionalizirana javno-zasebna partnerstva so skupne „gospodarske tvorbe“ med zasebnimi in javnimi partnerji.
IPPPs are joint industrial creations combining private and public partners.
Naloga takšne tvorbe je zagotavljanje ali opravljanje storitve v korist javnosti, običajno na področju javnega interesa.
The task of such creations is to provide or supply a service on behalf of the public, typically in the field of public welfare.
Institucionalizirana javno-zasebna partnerstva lahko nastanejo z ustanovitvijo mešanega podjetja, ali tako, da zasebnik prevzame nadzor v podjetju, ki je bilo prej javno, tj. s spremembo družabništva.
IPPPs may be created by the formation of a mixed-economy enterprise, but may also arise when a private company assumes control of what was a public concern, i.e. by changing the share ownership.
V zvezi s tem se postavlja vprašanje, ali sta ta postopka, ustanovitev in sprememba družabništva, pravno pomembna s stališča dodelitve koncesij.
This raises the question whether the two processes, new formation or a change of ownership, are relevant from the point of view of procurement law.
Po mnenju Komisije mora biti zasebni partner tega podjetja za zadevne naloge izbran na pregleden in nediskriminacijski način, in sicer odvisno od dejanske oblike naročila v skladu z direktivami o javnih naročilih ali Pogodbo ES.
The Commission says that the private partner of such an enterprise must be selected for the tasks involved in a transparent way and without discrimination, and must be so selected irrespective of the actual form of the contract under the procurement directives or the EC Treaty.
To mnenje Komisije je treba upoštevati, ker pravično konkurenco zagotavlja le izbira zasebnega partnerja v skladu z objektivnimi merili.
We would agree with the Commission on this, as only the selection of a private partner in accordance with objective criteria will safeguard fair competition.
Če bi bil izbran zasebni partner mešanega podjetja, bi bili nadaljnji razpisi za oddajo naročila le nepotrebno birokratsko breme.
When the private partner of a mixed-economy enterprise is selected, further invitations to tender for the contract would only be needless red tape.
Zato se je treba izogniti dvojnim razpisom.
So a second tendering process should be avoided,
Na pravkar omenjenem tematskem področju se pojavlja tudi vprašanje, ali je za dodelitev javnega naročila ali koncesije mešanemu podjetju nujen razpisni postopek.
As part of this discussion there is also the question of whether awarding a public contract or a concession to a mixed-economy enterprise makes a tendering procedure essential, in what is known as the ‘in-house’ problem.
V skladu s sodno prakso v zadevi Teckal udeležba organa za dodeljevanje v mešanih podjetjih ne upravičuje izjeme od načel dodeljevanja.
Under the Teckal case-law, the participation of the awarding authority in ‘semi-public’ or mixed-economy undertakings does not justify exemption from the principles of procurement law.
Odločilna je dodelitev samostojni pravni osebi.
What is crucial is to award the contract to a body with independent legal personality.
V skladu s tem se izjema od zakonodaje o javnih naročilih prizna takrat, kadar organ za dodeljevanje nadzira mešano podjetje in svojo službo ter kadar podjetje opravlja dejavnost zlasti za organ oblasti.
Accordingly an exemption from procurement law is recognised when the awarding authority exercises over the mixed-economy enterprise a control similar to that which it exercises over its own departments and when the enterprise essentially acts for the public body.
Izpolnjevati je treba obe merili, da je zagotovljena enakost z internimi enotami naročnika.
The two criteria must be cumulatively fulfilled to ensure that there is equivalence with internal entities of the contracting authority.
Sodna praksa v zadevi Stadt-Halle je pojasnila še en vidik.
The Stadt Halle case-law has further clarified the matter.
V skladu s tem, se je Sodišče Evropskih skupnosti odločilo, da smejo javni naročniki oddati naročilo podjetju, ki jim pripada, pri čemer se ne uporabljajo predpisi o javnih naročilih, le takrat, kadar imajo v lasti 100 % kapitala podjetja, torej kadar v podjetju ni nobene še tako majhne zasebne udeležbe.
The Court decided that public contracting authorities may award a contract to an undertaking that belongs to them without adhering to the procurement provisions only when they hold 100 % of the undertaking’s capital, in other words when there is not even a small private shareholding in the undertaking.
Le v tem primeru ima naročnik po mnenju Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti nadzor nad podjetjem in svojo službo.
Only then, says the Court, does the contracting authority exercise control as it would over its own departments.
Na drugi strani pa bi oddaja javnega naročila mešanemu podjetju brez razpisa škodila cilju neizkrivljene konkurence in načelu enakega obravnavanja zainteresiranih strani.
Second, awarding a public contract to a mixed-economy enterprise without a tendering procedure would damage the aim of undistorted competition and the principle of treating the interested parties equally.
Tak postopek bi dajal prednost zasebnemu podjetju, ki ima kapitalski delež v mešanem podjetju, pred konkurenti.
Such a procedure would give a private undertaking participating in the capital of a mixed-economy enterprise an advantage over its competitors.
V skladu s sodbo Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti z dne 13. januarja 2005 (Komisija/Španija) dogovorov o sodelovanju med lokalnimi organi ni mogoče na splošno izvzeti iz zakonodaje o javnih naročilih in to nadomestiti z neko nacionalno pravno obliko.
Under the Court’s judgment of 13 January 2005 in Case C-84/03 (Commission v Spain), cooperation agreements between local authorities cannot as a rule be excluded from procurement law by a national provision.
Zakonodaja o javnih naročilih se uporablja vedno, kadar dve osebi, ki se med seboj pravno razlikujeta, skleneta pogodbo za plačilo.
The law on contracts always applies when two legally distinct entities conclude a contract for pecuniary interest.
Zato ni bistven status udeleženih oseb.
The status of the entities is not at issue.
Lahko gre tudi za lokalne organe.
Local authorities may also be involved.
Sodba je v občinah po Evropi sprožila razpravo o tem, ali se za oblike medobčinskega sodelovanja uporablja zakonodaja o javnih naročilih ter v katerih primerih se uporablja ta zakonodaja.
The judgment has sparked off a debate among local authorities in Europe as to whether and in what circumstances forms of cooperation between local authorities are subject to procurement law.
Odgovor na to vprašanje mora temeljiti na opisu skupnosti.
An answer to this question must take as its starting point the definition of a public authority.
Za pravni red skupnosti v Evropi in državah članicah je značilno razlikovanje med državo in družbo.
A feature of the legal system for public authorities in Europe and the Member States is the distinction between the state and society.
Medtem ko so za družbo, ki vključuje tudi področje gospodarstva, značilni svoboda, zasebna avtonomija in trg, je v nasprotju s tem država z dodatnimi delitvami organizirana enota oblasti in odločanja.
While society, whose realm includes the economy, is characterised by freedom, private autonomy and the market, the state on the other hand, with its subdivisions, should be seen as an organised entity for exercising power and making decisions.
Posebnost zvezne države je ta, da imajo njene podenote lastno pravno osebnost, ki se razlikuje od pravne osebnosti skupne države.
A special feature of a federally organised state consists in the fact that its state subdivisions have separate legal personality, which distinguishes them from the overarching state.
V nasprotju z družbo pa so del državnosti.
Yet they remain, in terms of the distinction from society, a part of the state’s persona.
Pravila o sodelovanju posameznih nosilcev suverenosti so kot javnopravne pogodbe sestavni del nacionalne upravne organizacije in jih je zato treba strogo ločevati od t. i. pogodb med upravo in državljani, ki so pravno podrejene.
Rules on cooperation between individual authorities are, as agreements under public law, part of the national administrative organisation and hence should be strictly distinguished from subordinating legal agreements between the administration and the citizen.
V zvezi s tem je medobčinsko sodelovanje načeloma dogovor o pristojnosti znotraj upravne organizacije države članice.
Seen against this background, cooperation between local authorities are essentially an agreement on the exercise of responsibility within the administrative organisation of a Member State.
Po mnenju Komisije EU se „interno ponovno urejajo javne pristojnosti“.
The Commission says that internal reorganisations of public authorities are taking place.
Zato pri prenosu nalog med občinami ne gre za postopke oddaje javnih naročil pri tretjih osebah, ampak za nacionalne organizacijske ukrepe.
In the case of assignments of tasks between local authorities, these are not procurement processes involving third parties but internal measures of state organisation.
Naloga se znotraj države dodeli drugemu organu.
A task is awarded to another agency within the state.
V skladu z načelom prenosa pristojnosti EU na tem področju ni pristojna.
In this field, under the principle of limited competence, the EU has no competence.
Nasprotno je iz tega izvzeta nacionalna upravna organizacija v skladu z načelom postopkovne in organizacijske avtonomije EU, kar je tudi v skladu z mnenjem Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti.
Rather the national administrative organisation is disconnected from the EU, in accordance with the principle of procedural and organisational autonomy, as established in the case-law of the Court of Justice.
Če bi take primere reorganizacije opravljanja nalog znotraj celotne državne organizacije dejansko obravnavali kot primere, v katerih je treba uporabiti zakonodajo o javnih naročilih, bi to pomenilo posredno obveznost privatizacije.
Were one to regard such cases of reorganisation of task allocation within the overall state organisation as indeed subject to procurement law, this would be tantamount to an indirect requirement to privatise.
Vseeno to ne sme biti namerno, ker lahko država načeloma izbira, ali bo storitve opravila sama ali jih bo oddala tretjim osebam na trgu.
But this cannot be the intended aim, because the state is on principle free to decide whether to provide services itself or award them to third parties on the open market.
Razen tega bi bilo to v nasprotju s členom 295 PES, v skladu s katerim Pogodba ES ne obravnava ureditve lastninskopravnih razmerij držav članic.
Such an idea would also be at odds with Article 295 of the EC Treaty, under which the Member States’ system of property ownership remains unaffected by the Treaty.
Pravica do lokalne organizacijske suverenosti je zagotovljena na nacionalni in evropski ravni.
The right of local self-government is guaranteed both nationally and at European level.
Z evropskega stališča ta pravica izhaja na eni strani iz ideje o subsidiarnosti v skladu s členom 5 PES, na drugi strani pa iz členov 2 in 4 Evropske listine lokalne samouprave.
From the European point of view it derives firstly from the concept of subsidiarity in Article 5 of the EC Treaty, and secondly from Articles 2 and 4 of the European Charter of Local Self-Government.
Tudi Ustava za Evropo izrecno priznava regionalno in lokalno samoupravo in s tem povezane državne organizacijskopravne strukture iz člena I-5, ki navaja, da Unija spoštuje nacionalno identiteto držav članic, ki je neločljivo povezana z njihovimi temeljnimi političnimi in ustavnimi strukturami, vključno z regionalno in lokalno samoupravo .
Even the Treaty on the European Constitution now expressly recognises regional and local self-government and the associated structures of state organisation in Article I-5, when it says there that ‘the Union shall respect the national identities of its Member States, inherent in their fundamental structures, political and constitutional, inclusive of regional and local self-government ’.
Seveda ni možno vsakega dogovora med nosilci suverenosti samega po sebi izvzeti iz zakonodaje o javnih naročilih.
Obviously not every agreement between authorities can per se be subject to the procurement law.
Potrebno je ločevanje med povsem upravnoorganizacijskimi ukrepi in pogodbami javnega naročila med upravami.
Rather there is a need to differentiate between purely administrative measures and procurement agreements between administrative bodies.
Za slednje je treba uporabljati zakonodajo o javnih naročilih.
It is to the latter that the procurement law should apply.
Tudi sodba Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti z dne 13. januarja 2005 o dogovorih o sodelovanju v Španiji v tem smislu ne zagovarja drugačnega stališča.
To that extent not even the Court’s judgment of 13 January 2005 on cooperation agreements in Spain requires a change of approach.
Končno navaja le, da dogovori znotraj državne organizacije ne smejo biti posplošeno in splošno izključeni iz zakonodaje o javnih naročilih.
It ultimately says only that agreements within a state organisation may not be excluded from procurement law on an absolute basis and as a general rule.
Komisija mora na podlagi navedenih stališč razviti merila, da se odpravi sedanja pravna negotovost.
The Commission should on the basis of this approach devise criteria to ensure that the present legal uncertainty is removed.
o javno-zasebnih partnerstvih in zakonodaji Skupnosti o javnih naročilih in koncesijah
on public-private partnerships and Community law on public procurement and concessions
Pripravljavec mnenja (*): Werner Langen
Draftsman*: Werner Langen
Odbor za ekonomske in monetarne zadeve Odboru za notranji trg in varstvo potrošnikov predlaga, da v skupni predlog resolucije o javno-zasebnih partnerstvih vključi naslednje pobude:
The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs suggests the following points to the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection for inclusion in the joint motion for a resolution on PPPs:
A. ker je v številnih državah članicah Evropske unije v zadnjem desetletju nastalo veliko število javno-zasebnih partnerstev;
A. whereas numerous PPPs have arisen in many Member States over the past decade,
B. ker lahko v tej obliki sodelovanja, upoštevaje različne finančne in druge omejitve, zasebna podjetja svoje tehnično znanje in izkušnje, poslovno prakso in finančna sredstva ponudijo za izvajanje javnih nalog, s čimer tudi ob pomanjkanju proračunskih sredstev zagotovijo kakovostne storitve za ugodno ceno, javnemu sektorju pa hkrati omogočijo, da učinkovito opravlja ključne naloge;
B. whereas in this form of cooperation, taking into account the various financial and other material constraints, private enterprise can offer its technical know-how, a business-oriented approach, and financial resources for the purpose of performing public service tasks and thus help to ensure that, even when budgets are being cut, high-quality services can be provided at attractive prices and public authorities are likewise able to deal effectively with their core activities,
C. ker se projekti javno-zasebnega partnerstva izvajajo pretežno na lokalni in občinski ravni; ker je treba podobne projekte hkrati izvajati tudi na evropski ravni, zlasti projekt vseevropskega prometnega omrežja,
C. whereas in the main, local and municipal authorities have sought to enter into PPP projects; whereas, however, there is also a need for such projects at European level, not least to implement the trans-European transport networks,
D. ker je treba v vsakem posameznem primeru preveriti, ali si je mogoče od javno-zasebnega partnerstva obetati več koristi kot od drugih možnosti, na primer običajnih javnih naročil oziroma lastne izvedbe,
D. whereas it should be determined in each particular case whether a PPP is likely to provide added value compared with other approaches such as a traditional contract award procedure or services performed by the public authorities themselves,
E. ker so značilnosti javno-zasebnih projektov primerljive, čeprav na ravni Skupnosti ne obstaja enotna opredelitev javno-zasebnih partnerstev,
E. whereas there is no standard Community-wide definition of a PPP, but PPP projects have comparable characteristics,
F. ker so v skladu s členom 3 Pogodbe ES prepoved trgovinskih ovir, svoboda ustanavljanja in opravljanja storitev ter prost pretok blaga, oseb, storitev in kapitala splošna načela prava Skupnosti, ki se uporabljajo na evropskem notranjem trgu za javno-zasebna partnerstva,
F. whereas under Article 3 of the EC Treaty, the non-affectation of trade, the freedom of establishment, the freedom to provide services and the freedom of movement of goods, capital and services are general principles of Community law which apply to PPPs in the context of the European internal market,
G. ker je treba v skladu s členom 86 Pogodbe ES storitve splošnega gospodarskega pomena opravljati v skladu s pravili ES o konkurenci, na katerih temelji notranji trg, če uporaba teh pravil ne ovira izvajanja posebnih nalog podjetij, ki so pooblaščena za opravljanje teh storitev,
G. whereas Article 86 of the EC Treaty provides that services of general economic interest must be provided in accordance with the EC competition rules that underpin the internal market, in so far as the application of the rules do not obstruct the performance of the particular tasks of the undertakings entrusted with the operation of such services,
H. ker so v skladu s členom 5 Pogodbe ES, ki določa načelo subsidiarnosti, v skladu s katerim so lokalni organi in države članice pristojni za opredelitev ter financiranje storitev splošnega gospodarskega pomena,
H. whereas Article 5 of the EC Treaty establishes the principle of subsidiarity, according to which local authorities and Member States have responsibility for defining and financing services of general economic interest,
I. ker različne sodbe Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti opredeljujejo pogoje za obliko javno-zasebnih partnerstev brez postopka za oddajo naročil in ker Sodišče Evropskih skupnosti obravnava veliko pravnih sporov na področju oddaje pogodb o opravljanju storitev, ki so nastali zato, ker so pojmi interni, oddaja javnih naročil na področju gradbeništva in storitev ter koncesije in njihove različne oblike pomanjkljivo pravno opredeljeni,
I. whereas, as a result of various rulings by the Court of Justice of the European Communities, the form of PPP not involving an award procedure has been made subject to conditions, whereas increasing numbers of disputes about the award of service contracts are being brought before the Court of Justice owing to the lack of legal precision surrounding the concepts of in-house relations, public works contracts, public service contracts, and concessions in their various forms,