natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
This means that cooperation and coordination must be established between the national bodies whose job it is to take action against euro counterfeiting (banks, the police, the judiciary) and the relevant EU institutions and bodies (the ECB, OLAF, Europol).
This means that cooperation and coordination must be established between the national bodies whose job it is to take action against euro counterfeiting (banks, the police, the judiciary) and the relevant EU institutions and bodies (the ECB, OLAF, Europol).
Such cooperation and mutual assistance between those involved at a national or EU level in ensuring that the euro is protected against counterfeiting is governed by Council Regulation (EC) No 1338/2001 of 28 June 2001 laying down measures necessary for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting
Such cooperation and mutual assistance between those involved at a national or EU level in ensuring that the euro is protected against counterfeiting is governed by Council Regulation (EC) No 1338/2001 of 28 June 2001 laying down measures necessary for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting
OJ L 181, 4.7.2001, p.
OJ L 181, 4.7.2001, p.
Cooperation between the Commission, the ECB and national authorities takes the following forms:
Cooperation between the Commission, the ECB and national authorities takes the following forms:
- exchange of information on the prevention of counterfeiting and the fight against the circulation of forged notes and coins;
- exchange of information on the prevention of counterfeiting and the fight against the circulation of forged notes and coins;
- regular updates on the impact of counterfeiting with a view to carrying out strategic analysis;
- regular updates on the impact of counterfeiting with a view to carrying out strategic analysis;
- mutual assistance, particularly scientific support and training in logistical support for the Member States.
- mutual assistance, particularly scientific support and training in logistical support for the Member States.
To this end, the ECB signed an agreement with Europol on 13 December 2001 aimed at coordinating their activities relating to the fight against counterfeiting, exchanging information and other issues.
To this end, the ECB signed an agreement with Europol on 13 December 2001 aimed at coordinating their activities relating to the fight against counterfeiting, exchanging information and other issues.
In addition, Europol and the Commission signed an agreement on 18 February 2003 allowing for the exchange of strategic information (excluding personal data).
In addition, Europol and the Commission signed an agreement on 18 February 2003 allowing for the exchange of strategic information (excluding personal data).
It is clear, however, that cooperation between the competent authorities in all the Member States needs to be enhanced in order to combat euro counterfeiting.
It is clear, however, that cooperation between the competent authorities in all the Member States needs to be enhanced in order to combat euro counterfeiting.
c) Creating a system for the exchange of technical, statistical and criminal information via centralised bodies
c) Creating a system for the exchange of technical, statistical and criminal information via centralised bodies
Information will be the key element in protecting the euro against counterfeiting.
Information will be the key element in protecting the euro against counterfeiting.
Two broad categories of information will be involved: technical and statistical data relating to various kinds of counterfeiting; and criminal data.
Two broad categories of information will be involved: technical and statistical data relating to various kinds of counterfeiting; and criminal data.
With a view to ensuring the exchange of up-to-date, comprehensive and comparable information, a system has been set up to centralise criminal, technical and statistical information in the following manner:
With a view to ensuring the exchange of up-to-date, comprehensive and comparable information, a system has been set up to centralise criminal, technical and statistical information in the following manner:
- Technical and statistical information on counterfeit notes and coins found in the Member States is collated and catalogued by the Member States and sent to the ECB to be filed and processed.
- Technical and statistical information on counterfeit notes and coins found in the Member States is collated and catalogued by the Member States and sent to the ECB to be filed and processed.
The Counterfeit Analysis Centre was established and is managed under the aegis of the ECB.
The Counterfeit Analysis Centre was established and is managed under the aegis of the ECB.
It centralises the classification and analysis of technical data on forged banknotes.
It centralises the classification and analysis of technical data on forged banknotes.
The European Technical and Scientific Centre (an independent administrative body within the French Mint) is responsible for classifying and carrying out technical analyses on forged coins.
The European Technical and Scientific Centre (an independent administrative body within the French Mint) is responsible for classifying and carrying out technical analyses on forged coins.
- Criminal information is centralised at the level of:
- Criminal information is centralised at the level of:
The National Central Office set up under the 1929 Geneva Convention.
The National Central Office set up under the 1929 Geneva Convention.
This office is responsible for gathering information that might be of use in investigations and in the prevention and suppression of currency counterfeiting.
This office is responsible for gathering information that might be of use in investigations and in the prevention and suppression of currency counterfeiting.
It gathers information and sends it to Europol via Europol’s national unit;
It gathers information and sends it to Europol via Europol’s national unit;
Europol, whose powers in the field of combating currency counterfeiting were conferred upon it by the Council Decision of 6 December 2001.
Europol, whose powers in the field of combating currency counterfeiting were conferred upon it by the Council Decision of 6 December 2001.
d) Establishing a policy on prevention and training for those responsible for detecting counterfeit currency
d) Establishing a policy on prevention and training for those responsible for detecting counterfeit currency
The fourth key element in the comprehensive protection mechanism for the euro is the development of a training policy designed for all those at national and Community level – as well as in candidate countries and third countries – connected with the circulation of the euro.
The fourth key element in the comprehensive protection mechanism for the euro is the development of a training policy designed for all those at national and Community level – as well as in candidate countries and third countries – connected with the circulation of the euro.
There is a need for this kind of training policy because the euro is still relatively new and people are not familiar with the notes and coins.
There is a need for this kind of training policy because the euro is still relatively new and people are not familiar with the notes and coins.
The Council adopted the Pericles Programme in response to this need for a training programme.
The Council adopted the Pericles Programme in response to this need for a training programme.
THE PERICLES PROGRAMME
THE PERICLES PROGRAMME
Council Decision 2001/923/EC of 17 December 2001
Council Decision 2001/923/EC of 17 December 2001
OJ L 339, 21.12.2001, p.
OJ L 339, 21.12.2001, p.
50. established an exchange, assistance and training programme for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting (the Pericles Programme).
50. established an exchange, assistance and training programme for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting (the Pericles Programme).
The Pericles Programme is designed for all those involved in preventing, detecting and stopping currency counterfeiting.
The Pericles Programme is designed for all those involved in preventing, detecting and stopping currency counterfeiting.
The programme’s training activities are designed for all those whose jobs are connected with the introduction, circulation and use of the euro in a professional capacity.
The programme’s training activities are designed for all those whose jobs are connected with the introduction, circulation and use of the euro in a professional capacity.
The main aim of the programme is to improve the skills of those who come into contact with the euro at a professional level (such as police officers, customs officials, civil servants, representatives of national or commercial banks, judges, tax officials, lawyers, etc.).
The main aim of the programme is to improve the skills of those who come into contact with the euro at a professional level (such as police officers, customs officials, civil servants, representatives of national or commercial banks, judges, tax officials, lawyers, etc.).
The programme can thus provide funding for actions involving exchanges of information (via seminars, specialised workshops, conferences etc.), staff exchanges and work placements, as well as technical, scientific and operational back-up.
The programme can thus provide funding for actions involving exchanges of information (via seminars, specialised workshops, conferences etc.), staff exchanges and work placements, as well as technical, scientific and operational back-up.
In short, the aim of the Pericles Programme is to support and supplement actions by the Member States that foster cooperation between the national, European and international authorities responsible for taking action to combat euro counterfeiting.
In short, the aim of the Pericles Programme is to support and supplement actions by the Member States that foster cooperation between the national, European and international authorities responsible for taking action to combat euro counterfeiting.
Pericles is a four-year programme with a reference amount of EUR 4 million (EUR 1 million per year), which began on 1 January 2002 and is due to end on 31 December 2005.
Pericles is a four-year programme with a reference amount of EUR 4 million (EUR 1 million per year), which began on 1 January 2002 and is due to end on 31 December 2005.
Article 13(3) of the Pericles Decision stipulates that the Commission must send the following to Parliament and the Council, by 30 June 2005 at the latest:
Article 13(3) of the Pericles Decision stipulates that the Commission must send the following to Parliament and the Council, by 30 June 2005 at the latest:
- a report evaluating the relevance, efficiency and effectiveness of the programme; and
- a report evaluating the relevance, efficiency and effectiveness of the programme; and
- a communication on whether the programme should be continued and adapted.
- a communication on whether the programme should be continued and adapted.
The evaluation report was submitted on 30 November 2004 and the communication on 6 April 2005.
The evaluation report was submitted on 30 November 2004 and the communication on 6 April 2005.
Both documents conclude that the Pericles Programme is relevant and that there is a need for it to be extended for six more years and adapted to take account of new requirements and to iron out certain problems that had been identified.
Both documents conclude that the Pericles Programme is relevant and that there is a need for it to be extended for six more years and adapted to take account of new requirements and to iron out certain problems that had been identified.
IV. – THE LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS FOR COUNCIL DECISIONS TO EXTEND AND ADAPT THE PERICLES PROGRAMME
IV. – THE LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS FOR COUNCIL DECISIONS TO EXTEND AND ADAPT THE PERICLES PROGRAMME
The Commission has submitted two proposals for Council Decisions:
The Commission has submitted two proposals for Council Decisions:
a) Proposal one
a) Proposal one
This document proposes that the Council Decision of 17 December 2001 establishing the Pericles Programme be extended and amended.
This document proposes that the Council Decision of 17 December 2001 establishing the Pericles Programme be extended and amended.
The legal basis for the proposal is the third sentence of Article 123(4) of the EC Treaty.
The legal basis for the proposal is the third sentence of Article 123(4) of the EC Treaty.
There is a well-informed but arguable opinion that the legal basis being used for the Decision only allows for its scope to be extended to those Member States that have adopted the euro as a single currency, and excludes the other Member States.
There is a well-informed but arguable opinion that the legal basis being used for the Decision only allows for its scope to be extended to those Member States that have adopted the euro as a single currency, and excludes the other Member States.
The main points in the proposal involve:
The main points in the proposal involve:
- extending the programme for a further six years, from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2011, with the reference amount unchanged at EUR 1 million per year;
- extending the programme for a further six years, from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2011, with the reference amount unchanged at EUR 1 million per year;
- increasing the maximum amount of Community cofinancing from 70% to 80%;
- increasing the maximum amount of Community cofinancing from 70% to 80%;
- allowing Member States to submit more than one project application per year where necessary;
- allowing Member States to submit more than one project application per year where necessary;
- extending technical and operational back-up to administrative support for cross-border police investigations, with Europol’s involvement.
- extending technical and operational back-up to administrative support for cross-border police investigations, with Europol’s involvement.
c) Proposal two
c) Proposal two
With a view to avoiding any legal challenges to the first proposal (which is based on Article 123 of the EC Treaty) being brought before the Court of Justice, a second proposal for a decision has also been presented, this time based on Article 308 of the EC Treaty.
With a view to avoiding any legal challenges to the first proposal (which is based on Article 123 of the EC Treaty) being brought before the Court of Justice, a second proposal for a decision has also been presented, this time based on Article 308 of the EC Treaty.
The second proposal simply extends the content of the first proposal to cover those Member States that have not adopted the euro as a single currency.
The second proposal simply extends the content of the first proposal to cover those Member States that have not adopted the euro as a single currency.
V. – RAPPORTEUR’S OPINION
V. – RAPPORTEUR’S OPINION
First, from an overall perspective, your rapporteur agrees with the idea of extending the Pericles Programme in view of the need to maintain training and technical back-up to help protect the euro.
First, from an overall perspective, your rapporteur agrees with the idea of extending the Pericles Programme in view of the need to maintain training and technical back-up to help protect the euro.
He also agrees with the idea of making adjustments to the programme to account for new requirements and to remove the red tape involved in implementing the current Pericles Programme.
He also agrees with the idea of making adjustments to the programme to account for new requirements and to remove the red tape involved in implementing the current Pericles Programme.
That said, however, your rapporteur is of the opinion that several practical aspects of the legislative proposal could be improved upon via the following suggested amendments, should the members of the LIBE Committee be prepared to accept them:
That said, however, your rapporteur is of the opinion that several practical aspects of the legislative proposal could be improved upon via the following suggested amendments, should the members of the LIBE Committee be prepared to accept them:
a) Amendments 2, 9,12, 21 and 22 propose an expansion of the programme up to 2013 with a view to adapting it to take account of the financial perspectives for 2007-2013, thereby enabling the future requirements of Member States that adopt the euro as a single currency to be addressed;
a) Amendments 2, 9,12 and 21 and 22 propose an expansion of the programme up to 2013 with a view to adapting it to take account of the financial perspectives for 2007-2013, thereby enabling the future requirements of Member States that adopt the euro as a single currency to be addressed;
b) Amendments 5 and 6 seek to explain the insertion into the Pericles Decision (2001/923/EC) of the importance of the coordination at a European scale of all the actions carried out in the field of combating counterfeiting and the appropriateness of involving in this coordination third countries which, despite not having the euro as their currency, can be considered important players in the prevention of fraud;
b) Amendments 5 and 6 seek to explain the insertion into the Pericles Decision (2001/923/EC) of the importance of the coordination at a European scale of all the actions carried out in the field of combating counterfeiting and the appropriateness of involving in this coordination third countries which, despite not having the euro as their currency, can be considered important players in the prevention of fraud;
c) Amendments 1 and 3 have been suggested in an effort to make the text clearer and simpler;
c) Amendments 1 and 3 have been suggested in an effort to make the text clearer and simpler;
d) The intention behind amendments 7, 8, 18, 19 and 20 is, on the one hand, to introduce an element of political scrutiny and effectiveness into the implementation and monitoring of the programme by suggesting that a Pericles consultative committee be set up and that an annual progress report on the programme be submitted to Parliament;
d) The intention behind amendments 7, 8, 18, 19 and 20 is, on the one hand, to introduce an element of political scrutiny and effectiveness into the implementation and monitoring of the programme by suggesting that a Pericles consultative committee be set up and that an annual progress report on the programme be submitted to Parliament;
e) Amendments 10 and 11 seek to broaden the aims and content of the measures laid down in the original Pericles Programme;
e) Amendments 10 and 11 seek to broaden the aims and content of the measures laid down in the original Pericles Programme;
f) Amendments 12, 13, 14 and 15 relate to funding and reduce cofinancing to 70%, but make cofinancing of up to 90% possible in certain circumstances;
h) Amendments 12, 13, 14 and 15 relate to funding and reduce cofinancing to 70%, but make cofinancing of up to 90% possible in certain circumstances;
g) Amendment 17 is designed to provide clearer definitions of some of the parameters that need to be taken into account when selecting the projects that are eligible for Pericles fund
i) Amendment 17 is designed to provide clearer definitions of some of the parameters that need to be taken into account when selecting the projects that are eligible for Pericles funding.
Predlog Sklepa Sveta o spremembi in podaljšanju Sklepa Sveta z dne 17. decembra 2001 o vzpostavitvi programa izmenjave, pomoči in usposabljanja za zaščito eura proti ponarejanju (program „Pericles“)
Proposal for a Council decision amending and extending the Council Decision of 17 December 2001 establishing an exchange, assistance and training programme for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting (the ‘Pericles’ programme)
člen 123(4) ES
Article 123(4) EC
o predlogu Sklepa Sveta o razširitvi na nesodelujoče države članice izvajanje Sklepa Sveta o spremembi in podaljšanju Sklepa Sveta z dne 17. decembra 2001 o vzpostavitvi programa izmenjave, pomoči in usposabljanja za zaščito eura proti ponarejanju (program "Pericles")
on the proposal for a Council decision extending to the non-participating Member States the application of the Council Decision amending and extending the Council Decision of 17 December 2001 establishing an exchange, assistance and training programme for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting (the 'Pericles' programme)
OSNUTEK ZAKONODAJNE RESOLUCIJE EVROPSKEGA PARLAMENTA......................5
DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION..............................5
UL C ... z dne..., str. .... ,
OJ C … ,
– ob upoštevanju člena 308 Pogodbe ES, v skladu s katerim se je Svet posvetoval s Parlamentom ( C6-0115/2005 ),
– having regard to Article 308 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament ( C6‑0115/2005 ),
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za državljanske svoboščine, pravosodje in notranje zadeve in mnenja Odbora za proračun ( A6-0275/2005 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Budgets ( A6‑0275/2005 ),
Predlog Sklepa Sveta o razširitvi na nesodelujoče države članice izvajanje Sklepa Sveta o spremembi in podaljšanju Sklepa Sveta z dne 17. decembra 2001 o vzpostavitvi programa izmenjave, pomoči in usposabljanja za zaščito eura proti ponarejanju (program "Pericles")
Proposal for a Council decision extending to the non-participating Member States the application of the Council Decision amending and extending the Council Decision of 17 December 2001 establishing an exchange, assistance and training programme for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting (the 'Pericles' programme)
Datum posvetovanja z EP
Date of consultation of EP
Datum razglasitve na zasedanju
Date authorisation announced in plenary
Namestniki (člen 178(2)), navzoči pri končnem glasovanju
Substitutes (Rule 178(2)) present for the final vote
o letnem poročilu o delu evropskega varuha človekovih pravic za leto 2004
on the annual report on the activities of the European Ombudsman for the year 2004
– ob upoštevanju letnega poročila o delu evropskega varuha človekovih pravic za leto 2004,
– having regard to the annual report on the activities of the European Ombudsman for the year 2004,
– ob upoštevanju člena 195 Pogodbe ES,
– having regard to Article 195 of the EC Treaty,
– ob upoštevanju člena 43 Listine o temeljnih pravicah,
– having regard to Article 43 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights,
– ob upoštevanju resolucije z dne 17. novembra 1993 o demokraciji, preglednosti in subsidiarnosti ter medinstitucionalnem sporazumu o postopkih za izvajanje načela subsidiarnosti; predpisov in splošnih pogojev, ki urejajo opravljanje nalog varuha človekovih pravic, in ob upoštevanju dogovorjenih postopkov Spravnega odbora v skladu s členom 189 b ES
– having regard to its resolution of 17 November 1993on democracy, transparency and subsidiarity and the Interinstitutional Agreement on procedures for implementing the principle of subsidiarity; the regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the Ombudsman’s duties; the arrangements for the proceedings of the Conciliation Committee under Article 189 b EC
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za peticije ( A6‑0276/2005 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Petitions ( A6‑0276/2005 ),
A. ker so Listino o temeljnih pravicah slavnostno razglasili v Nici 7. decembra 2000 in ker obstaja politična volja, da se ji dodeli pravno zavezujoč značaj,
A. whereas the Charter of Fundamental Rights was solemnly proclaimed in Nice on 7 December 2000 and forms part of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe,
B. ker člen 41 Listine o temeljnih pravicah določa, da ima vsaka oseba pravico, da institucije in organi Unije njegove ali njene zadeve obravnavajo nepristransko, pravično in v razumnem roku,
B. whereas Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights provides that every person has the right to have his or her affairs handled impartially, fairly and within a reasonable time by the institutions and bodies of the Union,