natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Naši otroci tako ne bodo več odvisni od dobre volje raziskovalnega sektorja v Ameriki ali Aziji.
That will mean that our children will no longer have to depend on the good will of the research sector in the USA or Asia.
Skupno stališče Sveta z namenom sprejetja Uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o zdravilih za pediatrično uporabo in spremembah Uredbe (EGS) št. 1768/92, Direktive 2001/20/ES, Direktive 2001/83/ES in Uredbe (ES) št. 726/2004
Common Position adopted by the Council on 10 March 2006 with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on medicinal products for paediatric use and amending Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92, Directive 2001/20/EC, Directive 2001/83/EC and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004
Datum razglasitve prejetja skupnega stališča na zasedanju
Date on which receipt of common position announced in plenary
Izid končnega glasovanja
Outcome of final vote
Namestniki, navzoči na končnem glasovanju
Substitutes present for final vote
Pripombe (na voljo samo v enem jeziku)
Comments (information available in one language only)
Jean-Marie Cavada , Odbor za državljanske svoboščine, pravosodje in notranje zadeve
Jean-Marie Cavada , Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs
(*) Okrepljeno sodelovanje med odbori – člen 47 poslovnika
(*)Enhanced cooperation between committees - Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure
MNENJE Odbora za državljanske svoboščine, pravosodje in notranje zadeve 14
OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS 13
o posledicah sodbe Sodišča z dne 13. septembra 2005 (C-176/03 Komisija/Svet)
on the consequences of the judgment of the Court of 13 September 2005 (C-176/03 Commission/Council)
– ob upoštevanju člena 10 Pogodbe ES in člena 47 Pogodbe EU,
– having regard to Article 10 of the EC Treaty and Article 47 of the EU Treaty,
– ob upoštevanju člena 5 Pogodbe ES,
– having regard to Article 5 of the EC Treaty,
– ob upoštevanju svoje resolucije z naslovom "Pravne podlage in upoštevanje prava Skupnosti" z dne 3. septembra 2003
– having regard to its Resolution of 3 September 2003 on legal bases and compliance with Community law
UL C 76 E, 25.3.2004, str.
OJ C 76 E of 25.3.2004, p.
– ob upoštevanju sodbe Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti z dne 13. septembra 2005
– having regard to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 13 September 2005
Zadeva C-176/03, Komisija/Svet, še neobjavljena v Zborniku. ,
Case C-176/03, Commission v. Council, not yet published in the reports (OJ C 315, 10.12.2005, p.2) ,
– ob upoštevanju Sporočila Komisije Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu o posledicah sodbe Sodišča z dne 13. septembra 2005 (C-176/03 Komisija/Svet), (KOM (2005)0583),
– having regard to the communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implications of the Court's judgment of 13 September 2005 (Case C-176/03 Commission v. Council) (COM 2005)0583),
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za pravne zadeve in mnenja Odbora za državljanske svoboščine, pravosodje in notranje zadeve ( A6‑0172/2006 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs ( A6‑0172/2006 ),
A. ker organi Skupnosti skrbijo predvsem za učinkovito izvajanje predpisov prava Skupnosti, kar predstavlja temeljno obveznost držav članic, določeno s členom 10 Pogodbe ES,
A. whereas the effective implementation of Community law is one of the main concerns of the Community institutions and a fundamental obligation of the Member States, as laid down in Article 10 of the Treaty establishing the European Community,
B. ker za vsak ukrep Skupnosti velja načelo subsidiarnosti, v skladu s členom 5 Pogodbe,
B. whereas any action taken by the Community must accord with the subsidiarity principle laid down in Article 5 of the Treaty,
C. ker je sodna praksa Sodišča večkrat določila, da lahko ukrepi, potrebni za zagotovitev učinkovite uporabe prava Skupnosti, vključujejo kazenske sankcije,
C. whereas the case law of the Court of Justice has repeatedly established that the measures required to ensure the effective implementation of Community law may involve criminal penalties,
D. poudarja, da načelo prednosti prava Skupnosti in načelo sodelovanja v dobri veri lahko vplivata na nacionalno kazensko zakonodajo držav članic, če so te dolžne v skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča:
D. whereas the principles of the primacy of Community law and cooperation in good faith can affect the national criminal legislation of the Member States in so far as the latter are obliged, in accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice:
– odpraviti vse kazenske določbe, ki niso v skladu s pravom Skupnosti (sodba z dne 19. januarja 1999 v zadevi C-348/96, Donatella Calfa, točka 17: "kljub temu, da je kazenska zakonodaja načeloma v pristojnosti držav članic, je sodna praksa vedno takšna, da pravo Skupnosti tej pristojnosti postavlja določene meje, ker takšna zakonodaja ne sme omejevati temeljnih svoboščin, ki jih zagotavlja pravo Skupnosti"
- to rescind any provision of criminal law that is incompatible with Community law (judgment of 19 January 1999 in Case C-348/96, Donatella Calfa, point 17: ‘Although in principle criminal legislation is a matter for which the Member States are responsible, the Court has consistently held that Community law sets certain limits to their power, and such legislation may not restrict the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by Community law’
Zbornik 1999, str.
ECR 1999, p.
– predvideti "učinkovite, sorazmerne in odvračilne" sankcije, če potrebno tudi kazenske, da se zagotovi izvajanje prava Skupnosti (sodba z dne 21. septembra 1989 v zadevi 68/88 Komisija/Grčija
- to provide for ‘effective, proportionate and dissuasive’ penalties, including criminal ones where necessary, to enforce Community law (judgment of 21 September 1989 in Case 68/88, Commission/Greece
Zbornik 1989, str.
ECR 1989, p.
2965. ; sodba z dne 12. septembra 1996 v zadevi C-58/95, Gallotti
2965. ; judgment of 12 September 1996 in Case C‑58/95, Gallotti
Zbornik 1996, str.
ECR 1996, p.
I-4345. ; sodba z dne 21. septembra 1999 v zadevi C-378/97, Wijsenbeek
I-4345. ; judgment of 21 September 1999 in Case C-378/97, Wijsenbeek
I-6207. ; sodba z dne 28. januarja 1999 v zadevi C-77/97, Unilever, točka 36: "... določbe ..., ki jih morajo države članice sprejeti, da se izognejo ... morajo predvideti, da takšna oblika oglaševanja pomeni kršenje zakonodaje, ki je kaznivo dejanje, to pa narekuje sankcije, ki bodo imele odvračilen učinek"
I-6207. ; judgment of 28 January 1999 in Case C-77/97, Unilever, point 36: ‘(…) the measures which the Member States are required to take (…) in order to prevent (…) must provide that such advertisements constitute a breach of the law and, in particular, a criminal offence punishable by penalties having a deterrent effect’
E. ker je sodna praksa Sodišča razjasnila predvsem pravni osnovi, ki se uporabljata za prvi in tretji steber, vendar je bila v bistvu zanikana pristojnost evropskega zakonodajalca na kazenskem področju in na področju kazenskega postopka,
E. whereas the case-law of the Court of Justice primarily served to clarify which legal bases applied under the first and the third pillar while establishing that, as a general principle, the European legislature had no competence in relation to criminal matters or criminal procedural law,
F. še zlasti ker je v omenjeni sodbi, kljub izključitvi splošne pristojnosti Evropske skupnosti na kazenskem področju, Sodišče potrdilo, da to ne more ovirati zakonodajalca Skupnosti, ko dejanske, sorazmerne in odvračilne kazenske sankcije pristojnih nacionalnih organov pomenijo potreben ukrep za boj proti hudim okoljskim kršitvam, da sprejme ukrepe v povezavi s kazenskim pravom držav članic, za katere meni, da so potrebni za zagotavljanje polne učinkovitosti norm, ki jih določa na področju varstva okolja,
F. whereas, in particular, in the abovementioned judgment, the Court of Justice, while finding that, as a general rule, criminal matters did not fall within the Community's competence, stated that that did not prevent the Community legislature, when the application of effective, proportionate and dissuasive criminal penalties by the competent national authorities was an essential measure for combating serious environmental offences, from taking measures which related to the criminal law of the Member States which it considered necessary in order to ensure that the rules which it laid down on environmental protection were fully effective,
G. ker se je treba, glede na stalno prakso sodišča, za pravilno določitev pravne podlage akta Skupnosti, nanašati na cilj in vsebino samega akta, in ker so posledično, v skladu s členi Pogodbe EU od vključno 29. dalje, akti, sprejeti v okviru naslova VI Pogodbe EU, nezakoniti, če bi lahko, zaradi svojega cilja in vsebine, temeljili na Pogodbi ES,
G. whereas, in accordance with settled case law , to ensure that a Community act is adopted on the correct legal basis, the aim and content of the act itself must be taken into account and consequently, pursuant to Articles 29 et seq. of the EU Treaty, acts adopted under Title VI of the EU Treaty are unlawful if, by virtue of their aim and content, they could have been based on the EC Treaty instead,
H. ker je predmet sodbe Sodišča omejen na kazenske zadeve, povezane z varstvom okolja, ki je ena glavnih nalog Skupnosti, kot določata člena 2 in 3 Pogodbe ES,
H. whereas the subject of the judgment of the Court of Justice is limited to criminal matters relating to protection of the environment, which is one of the main tasks of the Community, as specified in Articles 2 and 3 of the EC Treaty,
I. ker je v zgoraj navedenem sporočilu Evropska komisija želela razširiti sklepe Sodišča in šteti za nezakonite kazenske določbe, sprejete v okviru naslova VI Pogodbe EU tudi v odnosu do drugih področij pristojnosti Skupnosti in ne le tistih, povezanih z okoljsko politiko,
I. whereas, in the abovementioned communication, the Commission sought to extend the conclusions of the Court of Justice, regarding as unlawful criminal provisions adopted under Title VI of the EU Treaty which related to other areas of Community competence also, and not just those relating to environmental policy,
J. ker ekstenzivna razlaga področja uporabe sodbe ni avtomatična,
J. whereas there appear to be no grounds for an automatic presumption in favour of a broad interpretation of the judgment,
K. ker Komisija meni tudi, da v veljavni zakonodaji morda obstajajo akti, ki temeljijo na naslovu VI Pogodbe EU, katerih pravna podlaga se v luči omenjene sodbe Sodišča, kot si jo v razširjeni obliki razlaga sama Komisija, šteje za napačno,
K whereas furthermore, according to the Commission, current legislation may include acts based on Title VI of the EU Treaty whose legal basis should be regarded as incorrect in the light of the abovementioned judgment of the Court of Justice, according to the broad interpretation of that judgment adopted by the Commission,
L. ker Komisija namerava, da bi preprečila razveljavitev zadevne zakonodaje in zagotovila pravno varnost, na različne načine poseči v veljavno zakonodajo in v še ne izvajane pobude,
L. whereas, in order to avert the need to annul the legislation in question and in order to ensure legal certainty, the Commission proposes to take various measures in relation to existing legislation and pending proposals,
M. ker je vprašanje zakonite vključitve kazenskih določb v zakonodajo, sprejeto na podlagi prvega stebra EU, pomembno in predstavlja nadaljnji korak v razvoju zakonodaje Skupnosti,
M. having regard to the importance of the question of the legitimacy of including criminal provisions in legislation adopted under the first pillar of the EU, as a further stage in the development of Community law,
N. ker ima Parlament vlogo zakonodajnega organa z demokratičnim imenovanjem in predstavnika evropskih narodov ter je, skupaj z drugimi evropskimi institucijami, gonilna sila za tak razvoj,
N having regard to Parliament's role as the legislative body invested with democratic authority as the representative of the peoples of Europe and, together with the other European institutions, the driving force behind the development of Community law,
2. pozdravlja dejstvo, da na osnovi tega vodila Sodišče poudarja možnost, da na področju varstva okolja evropski zakonodajalec v okviru prvega stebra sprejme kazenske določbe, potrebne za zagotovitev polne učinkovitosti norm, ki izhajajo iz istega stebra;
Is pleased that the Court of Justice, on the basis of that finding, confirms that the European legislature may adopt, under the first pillar, any criminal provisions necessary to ensure that the rules laid down under that pillar - in this instance, on environmental protection - are fully effective;
– pravic in svoboščin državljanov in drugih oseb (npr. v boju proti trgovini z ljudmi in v boju proti rasističnemu ali izrazito diskriminatornemu vedenju),
- of the rights and freedoms of citizens and other persons (for example in the fight against trafficking in human beings and the fight against racist or seriously discriminatory conduct),
– bistvenih interesov Unije, vključno z njenimi finančnimi interesi in bojem proti ponarejanju eura;
- of the essential interests of the European Union, including its financial interests and the fight against counterfeiting of the euro;
8. poziva Komisijo, naj za pregled ne uporabi splošnega in nedoločenega načina, ampak naj ponovno obravnava vsak posamezni akt, ki ga je sama določila, da bi tako zagotovila poglobljeno analizo in pravilno določitev pravne podlage za uporabo v konkretnem primeru;
Calls on the Commission to review the acts it has specified on a case-by-case basis, instead of adopting an undifferentiated, across-the-board approach, in order to ensure that, after careful consideration, the correct legal basis is chosen in each individual case;
10. opozarja Komisijo, da ponovno obravnavanje veljavnih zakonodajnih aktov, da bi po potrebi z neposrednimi predlogi popravili njihovo pravno podlago, pri čemer vsebina ostane nespremenjena, ne more odvzeti Parlamentu pravice do izvajanja svoje neodtujljive vloge so-zakonodajalca, in s tem žrtvovati demokratični prispevek, ki ga evropski integraciji zagotavlja Parlament kot predstavniški dom, ki ga neposredno izvolijo državljani;
10 Reminds the Commission that reviewing the legislation in force, and possibly submitting proposals designed to rectify the legal basis while leaving the substance of the legislation unchanged, must not involve depriving Parliament of its inalienable role as co-legislator and thus sacrificing the democratic input provided by Parliament, the elected body representing European citizens, in the process of European integration;
12. opozarja na določilo Sodišča, da sama direktiva, neodvisno od notranje zakonodaje, ki jo je država članica sprejela za izvajanje direktive, ne more imeti učinka na določitev ali povečanje kazenske odgovornosti tistih, ki s svojimi dejanji kršijo te določbe;
Notes, however, that the Court of Justice has ruled that a directive ‘cannot, of itself and independently of a national law adopted by a Member State for its implementation, have the effect of determining or aggravating the liability in criminal law of persons who act in contravention of the provisions of that directive’
16. opozarja države članice, da morajo v skladu s členom 10 Pogodbe ES zagotoviti splošno učinkovitost dejavnosti Skupnosti in jim zato priporoča, naj si prizadevajo, da bi tudi predpisi zadevnih kazenskih sistemov zasledovali ta cilj;
Reminds Member States that, pursuant to Article 10 of the EC Treaty, they are obliged to ensure that Community action is generally effective, and consequently urges them to do their utmost to ensure that the provisions of their respective national criminal law are also designed to comply with that objective;
Diritto penale ed Unione europea
I. Criminal law and the European Union
MNENJE Odbora za državljanske svoboščine, pravosodje in notranje zadeve
OPINIONOF THE COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS
(٭) Okrepljeno sodelovanje med odbori – člen 47 poslovnika
(*) Enhanced cooperation between committees (Rule 47)
Odbor za državljanske svoboščine, pravosodje in notranje zadeve poziva Odbor za pravne zadeve kot pristojni odbor, da v svoj predlog resolucije vključi naslednje pobude:
The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs calls on the Committee on Legal Affairs, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution (rule 47 - Enhanced cooperation between committees):
A. ker se zaveda, da je v teku desetletij izgradnja Evrope pripomogla k vzpostavitvi skupnega pravnega prostora, znotraj katerega so se nacionalni pravni redi in evropski pravni red postopoma prepletli v novo in izvirno zgradbo, ki ne temelji le na skupnih vrednotah, temveč tudi na načelih, ki dajejo prednost pravu Skupnosti in sodelovanju v dobri veri med državami članicami in evropskimi institucijami (člen 10 ustave ES),
A. mindful of the fact that over the decades the construction of Europe has brought with it the establishment of a common judicial area, within which the national and European legal systems have gradually become intertwined, forming a new and original structure based not only on shared values, but also on the principles of the primacy of Community law and cooperation in good faith between the Member States and the European institutions (Article 10 of the EC Treaty),
B. ker mora biti vsak ukrep Skupnosti v skladu z načelom subsidiarnosti, opredeljenim v členu 5 Pogodbe,
B. whereas all action taken by the Community is subject to the subsidiarity principle set out under Article 5 of the Treaty,
C. ker lahko načela prednosti prava Skupnosti in sodelovanja v dobri veri vplivajo na nacionalno kazensko zakonodajo držav članic, če so te dolžne v skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča:
C. whereas the principles of the primacy of Community law and cooperation in good faith can affect the national criminal legislation of the Member States in so far as the latter are obliged, in accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice:
- odpraviti vse kazenske določbe, ki niso v skladu s pravom Skupnosti (sodba z dne 19. januarja 1999 v zadevi C-348/96, Donatella Calfa, točka 17: "Kljub temu, da je kazenska zakonodaja načeloma v pristojnosti držav članic, je sodna praksa vedno takšna, da pravo Skupnosti tej pristojnosti postavlja določene meje, ker takšna zakonodaja ne sme omejevati temeljnih svoboščin, ki jih zagotavlja pravo Skupnosti"
- to rescind any provision of criminal law that is incompatible with Community law (judgment of 19 January 1999 in Case C-348/96, Donatella Calfa, point 17: ‘Although in principle criminal legislation is a matter for which the Member States are responsible, the Court has consistently held that Community law sets certain limits to their power, and such legislation may not restrict the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by Community law’
- predvideti "učinkovite, sorazmerne in odvračilne" sankcije, če potrebno tudi kazenske, da se zagotovi izvajanje prava Skupnosti (sodba z dne 21. septembra 1989 v zadevi 68/88 Komisija/Grčija
- to provide for ‘effective, proportionate and dissuasive’ penalties, including criminal ones where necessary, to enforce Community law (judgment of 21 September 1989 in Case 68/88 Commission/Greece
I-4345. ; sodba z dne 21. septembra 1999 v zadevi C-378/97, Wisjenbeek
I-4345. ; judgment of 21 September 1999 in Case C-378/97, Wijsenbeek
I-6207. ; sodba z dne 28. januarja 1999 v zadevi C-77/97, Unilever, točka 36: ".. določbe .., ki jih morajo države članice sprejeti, da se izognejo .. morajo predvideti, da takšna oblika oglaševanja pomeni kršenje zakonodaje, ki je kaznivo dejanje, to pa narekuje sankcije, ki bodo imele odvračilen učinek"
I-6207. ; judgment of 28 January 1999 in Case C-77/97, Unilever, point 36: ‘… the measures which the Member States are required to take … in order to prevent … must provide that such advertisements constitute a breach of the law and, in particular, a criminal offence punishable by penalties having a deterrent effect’
D. ker je Sodišče ponovno potrdilo splošno pravilo, da kazenske zadeve ne spadajo v področje pristojnosti Skupnosti; ker pa, kadar predstavlja uporaba učinkovitih, sorazmernih in odvračilnih kazni s strani pristojnih nacionalnih organov neobhodno potreben ukrep v boju proti hudim okoljskim prekrškom, to splošno pravilo Skupnosti ne preprečuje, da sprejme ukrepe, povezane s kazenskim pravom držav članic, ki so po njenem mnenju potrebni za zagotovitev polne učinkovitosti pravil, ki jih Skupnost določi na področju varstva okolja,
D. whereas the Court of Justice has reaffirmed the general rule that criminal matters do not fall within the Community's sphere of competence; whereas, however, when the application of effective, proportionate and dissuasive criminal penalties by the competent national authorities is an essential measure for combating serious environmental offences, that general rule does not prevent the Community from taking measures which relate to the criminal law of the Member States which it considers necessary in order to ensure that the rules which it lays down on environmental protection are fully effective,
E. ker je sodna praksa Sodišča v osnovi pojasnila pravne podlage, ki se lahko uporabljajo v okviru prvega in tretjega stebra,
E. whereas the case-law of the Court has essentially clarified the applicable legal bases under the first and third pillars,
F. ker je medsebojno vplivanje med pravnim sistemom Skupnosti in kazenskim pravom v državah članicah očiten pojav, ki ga preučujeta tako pravna doktrina kot sodna praksa, ker pa doslej v Pogodbi ni bilo nedvoumnih določb, se je Sodišče omejilo na ugotavljanje obstajanja pristojnosti Skupnosti, da določi administrativne kazni, ni pa se opredelilo glede vprašanja o kazenskih sankcijah (sodba z dne 27. marca 1990 v zadevi C-9/89, Kraljevina Španija/Svet)
F. whereas the interaction between the Community legal system and criminal law in the Member States is already an observable phenomenon on which both doctrine and case‑law are based, but whereas in the absence to date of unequivocal provisions in the Treaty the Court of Justice has restricted itself to noting the existence of a Community power to decree administrative penalties, remaining silent on the question of criminal sanctions (judgment of 27 March 1990 in Case C-9/89, Kingdom of Spain/Council
Zbornik 1990, str.
ECR 1990, p.
I-1383, točka 27. ,
I-1383, point 27. ),
G. ker je predmet sodbe Sodišča omejen na kazenske zadeve, povezane z varstvom okolja, ki je ena od glavnih nalog Skupnosti, kot določata člena 2 in 3 Pogodbe ES,
G. whereas the subject of the judgment of the Court of Justice is limited to criminal matters relating to the protection of environment, which is one of the main tasks of the Community, as specified in Articles 2 and 3 of the EC Treaty,
H. ker bi bilo treba zato odločbo Sodišča obravnavati previdno ter jo uporabiti od primera do primera na področjih, ki sodijo v okvir glavnih načel, ciljev in pristojnosti Skupnosti,
H. whereas the decision of the Court of Justice should therefore be considered with caution and applied on a case-by-case basis to those fields that are among the main principles, objectives and competences of the Community,
I. ker je Sodišče izdalo načelno odločitev, katere obseg uporabe presega okoljsko politiko in zajema vse skupne politike in temeljne svoboščine,
I. whereas the Court has handed down a decision of principle, the scope of which goes beyond environmental policy and extends to cover all the common policies and fundamental freedoms,