natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
H. ker so učinkovito pravno varstvo ter enotna uporaba in tolmačenje bistveni elementi prava Skupnosti,
H. whereas effective legal protection and uniform application and interpretation are essential elements of Community law,
I. ker je prejel 22. letno poročilo Komisije šele januarja 2006 in se bo zaradi te zamude v tem predlogu resolucije nanj le delno skliceval, jedro analize pa bo 21. letno poročilo Komisije o uporabi prava Skupnosti leta 2003,
I. whereas it received the Commission's 22nd annual report only in January 2006 and that because of this consistent delay only partial reference to the 2004 report will be made in the present motion for resolution, the core analysis being of the Commission's 21st annual report dealing with the application of Community law in 2003,
6. ugotavlja, da sta glavni težavi postopka za ugotavljanje kršitev (člena 226 in 228 PES) njegovo trajanje (povprečno 54 mesecev od prijave pritožbe in vložitve zadeve Sodišču) in omejena uporaba člena 228;
Notes that the main problems with the infringement procedure (Articles 226 and 228 TEC) are its length (54 months in average since the registration of the complaint and the referral to the Court) and the limited use of Article 228;
9. pozdravlja sporočilo Komisije „Boljši nadzor uporabe prava Skupnosti“ ( KOM(2002)0725 ), ki navaja različne ukrepe za dosego tega cilja;
Welcomes the Commission'sCommunication "Better Monitoring of the application of Community law" (COM (2002)0725), which sets out various actions to achieve its aim;
12. poziva Komisijo, da Parlament obvešča o rezultatih takšnih ocenjevanj; vztraja, da opredelitev prednostnih nalog ne sme povzročiti manjšega odziva na pritožbe državljanov, ter od Komisije zahteva, da se o vsaki morebitni spremembi prednostnih meril posvetuje s Parlamentom;
Calls on the Commission to keep Parliament informed of the results of such evaluations; insists that the definition of priorities should not lead to a decreased response to citizens’ complaints and urges the Commission to consult Parliament on any possible change in the priority criteria;
15. odločno poziva Komisijo, da ponovno oceni svojo popustljivost do držav članic, ko gre za skrajne roke za oddajo zahtevanih informacij Komisiji, sprejetje in sporočanje izvedbenih nacionalnih ukrepov ter pravilno uporabo zakonodaje Skupnosti na nacionalni, regionalni in lokalni ravni;
Calls on the Commission seriously to reassess its indulgence of Member States when it comes to the deadlines for submitting requested information to the Commission, adopting and communicating national implementing measures and correctly applying Community legislation at national, regional and local levels;
19. je prepričan, da čeprav je pomembno posvetiti čas in trud za razvijanje dialoga z državami članicami ter izboljšanje njim namenjene podpore za olajšanje hitrega in pravilnega prenosa evropske zakonodaje, je potrebna strožja disciplina, predvsem po širitvi, da se preprečijo pretirane zamude in trajne razlike v kakovosti prenosa na nacionalni ravni;
Is convinced that while it is important to devote time and effort to developing dialogue with Member States and improving the assistance to them in order to facilitate swift, correct transposition of European legislation, tighter discipline is necessary, notably after enlargement, in order to avoid excessive delays and persistent differences in the quality of national transposition;
24. poziva Komisijo, da predloži seznam tistih direktiv, ki imajo najslabši rezultat v smislu izvajanja, in poda mnenje o glavnih razlogih za to; poudarja, da so države članice v skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča in členom 10 Pogodbe o ES dolžne zagotoviti ustrezen sistem učinkovitih in sorazmernih sankcij, ki bodo odvračale od kršitev predpisov Skupnosti; meni, da bi bilo treba v primeru, ko učinkovit sistem sankcij ni sprejet, primerno strogo ukrepati v skladu s postopkom za ugotavljanje kršitev;
Invites the Commission to present a list of those directives which have the worst record in terms of their implementation and to explain what it considers the underlying reasons for this to be; points out that, under the case law of the Court of Justice and Article 10 of the EC Treaty, the Member States are required to ensure that an adequate system is in place for effective and proportionate sanctions, to act as a deterrent against infringement of Community provisions; considers that failure to adopt an effective system of sanctions should be pursued with due severity under the infringement procedure;
26. pozdravlja sporočilo Komisije Evropskemu parlamentu in evropskemu varuhu človekovih pravic o „odnosih s pritožnikom v zvezi s kršitvami zakonodaje Skupnosti“ (KOM (2002)0141);
Welcomes the Commission's Communication to the European Parliament and the European Ombudsman on "Relations with the complainant in respect of infringements of Community law" (COM (2002)0141);
30. poziva Komisijo, da sprejme posebne postopke, ki bi pritožniku in vpletenim poslancem Evropskega parlamenta omogočili dostop do dokumentacije in vsebine dopisovanja z državo članico;
Calls on the Commission to adopt a specific procedure which would allow the complainant and the MEP involved to have access to the documentation and to the substance of the correspondence exchanged with the Member;
34. opozarja, da morajo peticije, ki so jih posamezniki poslali Komisiji, evropskemu varuhu človekovih pravic in ustreznim parlamentarnim odborom, spodbuditi evropske institucije k oceni načina, po katerem se izvaja pravo Skupnosti na nacionalni in evropski ravni;
Recalls that petitions forwarded by individuals to the Commission, to the European Ombudsman and to the relevant parliamentary committees should encourage the European Institutions to assess the way in which Community law is being implemented at national and European level;
40. poziva k večjemu sodelovanju med nacionalnimi parlamenti in Evropskim parlamentom ter njihovimi pooblaščenimi poslanci, da se spodbudi in poveča učinkovit pregled evropskih zadev na nacionalni ravni; meni, da morajo poslanci imeti dragoceno vlogo pri nadzoru uporabe prava Skupnosti, s čimer pomagajo krepiti demokratično zakonitost Unije in jo približajo državljanom;
Calls for increased cooperation between national parliaments and the European Parliament and their respective parliamentarians, so as to promote and increase effective scrutiny of European matters at national level; considers that parliaments have a valuable role to play in the monitoring of the application of Community law, thus helping to strengthen the democratic legitimacy of the Union and bring it closer to the citizens;
Uvod: To poročilo v okviru bolje oblikovanih predpisov
Introduction: this report within the framework of better regulation
To poročilo se sklicuje tudi na poročilo iz leta 2004, ki ga je izdala Komisija januarja 2006.
This report will also make some reference to the 2004 report published by the Commission in January 2006.
Agenda EU o bolje oblikovanih predpisih izvira iz dveh ključnih pobud.
The origins of the EU’s ‘better regulation’ agenda lie in two key initiatives.
Prva je bila bela knjiga Komisije o evropskem upravljanju, ki jo je izdala nekdanja Prodijeva komisija leta 2001
The first was a Commission White Paper issued by the former Prodi Commission in 2001 on ‘ European Governance'
Njen cilj je bil izboljšati politiko EU s krepitvijo njene preglednosti, skladnosti, učinkovitosti in uspešnosti ter hkrati povečati sodelovanje in odgovornost javnosti v postopku njenega razvoja.
This aimed to improve EU policies by strengthening their transparency, coherence, effectiveness and efficiency, while at the same time boosting public participation and accountability in the process of their development.
Druga je bila tako imenovana „lizbonska strategija“.
The second was the so-called ‘Lisbon Strategy’.
Uvedle so jo države članice EU marca 2000 na zasedanju Evropskega sveta v Lizboni, njen cilj pa je bil preoblikovati EU v najbolj konkurenčno, na znanju temelječe gospodarstvo na svetu do leta 2010, za dosego česar je uvedla več novih mehanizmov za razvoj politike.
Launched by the EU’s Member States in March 2000 at the European Council in Lisbon, it aimed to make the EU the most competitive, knowledge-based economy in the world by 2010, and introduced a number of new mechanisms for policy development aimed at achieving this.
Naslednje leto so vodje EU na zasedanju v Göteborgu junija 2001, ob upoštevanju zavezanosti Pogodbe k trajnostnemu razvoju, lizbonski strategiji dodali okoljsko razsežnost.
The following year, reflecting the Treaty commitment to sustainable development, an environmental dimension was added to the Lisbon Strategy by EU leaders at their meeting in Gothenburg in June 2001.
Komisija se je prav tako odločila, da je treba bolje oblikovane predpise vključiti v proces oblikovanja politike in da je treba z novimi zakonodajnimi predlogi, ki jih je predstavila Komisija, spodbujati bolje oblikovane predpise in prispevati h konkurenčnosti.
The Commission has also decided that better regulation needs to be integrated into the process of policy-making and that new legislative proposals presented by the Commission must seek to promote better regulation and contribute to competitiveness.
V okviru tega so institucije EU v Medinstitucionalnem sporazumu o boljši zakonodaji, z dne 16. decembra 2003, vztrajale, da je pomembno poenostaviti in zmanjšati obseg zakonodaje EU.
In this context, in the Interinstitutional Agreement on better law-making of 16 December 2003, the EU institutions insisted on the importance of simplifying and reducing the volume of EU legislation.
V skladu z Medinstitucionalnim sporazumom je Komisija v svojem sporočilu z dne 16. marca 2005
In accordance with the Inter-institutional Agreement, in its Communication of 16 March 2005
KOM (2005)0097. , izrazila namen „ pregledati predloge, ki so v obravnavi v Svetu/Parlamentu, glede na njihov splošni pomen, vpliv na konkurenčnost ter druge vplive.“
COM (2005)0097 , the Commission declared its intention “ to screen proposals that are pending before the Council/Parliament with regard to their general relevance, their impact on competitiveness and other effects”.
V nedavnem sporočilu iz septembra 2005 o „rezultatih preverjanja zakonodajnih predlogov, ki čakajo na obravnavo zakonodajalca“, Komisija navaja cilje, postopek in rezultate tega preverjanja.
In the recent Communication of September 2005 on the "Outcome of the screening of legislative proposals pending before the Legislator", the Commission illustrates the objectives, process and outcomes of this screening exercise.
V javni razpravi in glede na težnjo v državah članicah in delno v EP je Komisija večkrat povedala, da je namen njenega novega pristopa zmanjšati obseg zakonodaje in opustiti neučinkovite zakonodajne akte.
In the public debate, and following a tendency present in the Member States and partially in the EP, the Commission repeatedly declared that its new approach is to reduce the volume of legislation and to get rid of ineffective legislative acts.
V zvezi s tem obstaja skrb, da se bo pomen izraza „bolje oblikovani predpisi“ močno zožil in se bo razlagal preprosto kot deregulacija ter uporabljal kot izgovor za tiste, ki želijo zmanjšati sredstva za ukrepe socialne zaščite in varstva okolja.
In this context, there is a certain concern that the meaning of ‘better regulation’ will become increasingly narrower and could be simply interpreted as de-regulation and used as an excuse for those seeking to roll back social and environmental protection measures.
Kakovost oblikovanja predpisov je treba najprej in v največji meri določiti z živahno razpravo, polno informacij, ki je zmožna izpolniti cilje, zaradi katerih je bila oblikovana.
The quality of regulation should be first and foremost determined by informed and vigorous political debate and by its capacity to fulfil the objectives for which it was drafted in the first place.
Če Komisija in Svet orodja za „bolje oblikovane predpise“ uporabita kot izgovor, da se izogneta, preprečita ali obideta politično razpravo, da bi ugodila interesu podjetij ali zmanjšala dolžnosti držav članic na ravni EU, bo pobuda težko pomirila evropske državljane
If the Commission and the Council use the tools of the ‘better regulation’ as an excuse to avoid, prevent, or bypass that political debate to the benefit of corporate interests or in order to diminish Member states obligations at EU level, the initiative will do preciously little to reassure Europe’s citizens
Glej Inštitut za evropsko okoljsko politiko „V dobrem ali slabem?
See Institute for European Environmental Policy "For Better or for Worse?
Agenda EU o okolju in „bolje oblikovanih predpisih“, november 2005. .
The EU's 'Better Regulation' s Agenda and the Environment", November 2005 .
Po drugi strani se mora po širitvi vsako zmanjšanje obsega zakonodaje nadomestiti z večjim poudarkom na njenem izvajanju.
On the other hand, after enlargement, a reduction in the amount of legislation produced must be compensated by placing a larger emphasis on implementation.
Najbolj očitni zaključek analize 21. poročila Komisije je ta, da je treba ustrezen znesek sredstev, predvidenih za oblikovanje in spremljanje zakonodaje, zdaj nameniti učinkovitemu in pravilnemu prenosu in izvajanju obstoječe evropske zakonodaje v različnih pristojnih enotah, ki se ukvarjajo s primeri kršitev.
The most obvious result of an analysis of the 21st Report of the Commission is that a relevant amount of resources attributed to the drafting and follow up of legislation should be now dedicated to the effective and correct transposition and implementation of existing European legislation in the different competent units dealing with the infringement cases.
V skladu s členom 211 Pogodbe je naloga Komisije zagotoviti, da države članice pravilno upoštevajo in izvajajo zakone Skupnosti.
In accordance with Article 211 of the Treaty, it is the task of the Commission to ensure that Member States observe and implement Community law properly.
Zlasti postopek iz člena 226 Pogodbe ES daje Komisiji znatno moč, da uveljavlja izvršilne postopke proti državam članicam , za katere meni, da niso opravljale svojih dolžnosti v skladu s pravom Skupnosti.
In particular, the procedure set out in article 226 of the EC Treaty gives the Commission a significant power to bring enforcement proceedings against Member States which it considers to be in breach of their obligations under Community law.
Velja omeniti, da člen 226, kot ugotavlja Komisija v prvem odstavku 21. poročila, te moči ne omejuje na predpise, ki so v nasprotju s temeljnimi načeli prava Skupnosti, zapisanimi v pogodbah; člen 226 pooblašča Komisijo za ukrepanje proti državam članicam, če te na kakršen koli način ne izpolnjujejo svojih obveznosti v okviru Pogodbe
It is worth noting that Article 226 does not, as the Commission intimates in the very first paragraph of its 21st Report, limit this power to rules ‘which are contrary to the fundamental principles of Community law as enshrined in the Treaties’; Article 226 empowers the Commission to take action against Member States for any failure to fulfil their obligations under the Treaty
V členu 226 Pogodbe je naveden postopek za primere, ko Komisija meni, da katera od držav članic ni izpolnila neke obveznosti v skladu z zakonodajo Skupnosti, pri čemer Komisija sestavi „ uradni opomin “ državi članici za domnevno kršitev in državi članici ponudi priložnost, da se o tem izreče.
Article 226 of the Treaty provides for a procedure in cases where the Commission considers that a Member State has failed to fulfil an obligation under Community law, whereby the Commission writes a " letter of formal notice " to the Member State allegedly committing the infringement concerned, giving it the opportunity to submit its observations.
Potem Komisija poda „ obrazloženo mnenje“ .
After that, the Commission delivers a " reasoned opinion ".
Če država članica še vedno noče sodelovati, lahko Komisija zadevo predloži Sodišču.
If the Member State still refuses to comply, the Commission may bring the matter before the Court of Justice.
Če Sodišče ugotovi, da katera od držav članic ni izpolnila neke obveznosti iz te pogodbe in da država članica ni sprejela potrebnih ukrepov za izvršitev sodbe Sodišča v določenem roku, se lahko pričnejo postopki v skladu s členom 228.
If the Court of Justice finds that a Member State has failed to fulfil an obligation under the Treaty and the Member State fails to take the necessary measures to comply with the Court's judgement within the time limit, proceedings can be commenced according to article 228.
Komisija lahko predloži primer Sodišču, pri čemer določi višino pavšalnega zneska ali denarne kazni, ki jo mora plačati država članica. .
The Commission may bring the case before the Court of Justice specifying the amount of the lump sum or penalty payment to be paid by the Member State. .
Komisija sproži izvršilne postopke kot odziv na pritožbo „pritožnika“ v državi članici ali na lastno pobudo (informacije, pridobljene iz tiska, vprašanj Evropskega parlamenta itd.).
The Commission initiates the enforcement proceedings either in response to a complaint from "a complainant" within the Member State, or on its own initiative (information gained for example through the press, European Parliament questions, etc).
V razširjeni Evropi je pravilno in pregledno izvajanje zakonov ključno za to, da se osmisli celoten evropski projekt.
In an enlarged EU the fact that laws are correctly and visibly implemented is essential to give a meaning to the whole European project.
To ni le vprašanje pravne obveznosti, ampak tudi politične odgovornosti.
This is not only a matter of legal obligation, but also a question of political responsibility.
Če se zakoni EU ne obravnavajo kot obvezujoči za vse ter če sta njihov prenos in izvajanje odvisna od dobre volje vlad ali se opirata na različne razlage, bomo kmalu v položaju ponovne nacionalizacije politik EU, kar bo očitno imelo negativen vpliv na notranji trg in celoten pravni red Skupnosti.
If EU laws are not perceived to be mandatory for all and if their transposition and implementation depend on the good will of this or that government or rely on different interpretations, we will soon have a situation of objective re-nationalisation of EU policies with obvious negative effects on the internal market and on the whole “acquis communautaire”.
Kot bomo videli v nadaljevanju poročila, je položaj že zaskrbljujoč, zlasti v okoljskem sektorju in na področju notranjega trga, kjer se lahko zgodi, da bodo nizke kazni, na katere je treba v obstoječih postopkih za primere kršitev tudi dolgo čakati, izničile kakršen koli odvračilni učinek sankcij.
As we will see later in this report, the situation is already quite worrying, above all in the environment and the internal market sectors, where the length and weakness of the punishment of the current infraction procedures threaten to cancel out any real deterrent effect of the sanction.
Odbor meni, da mora Komisija resno in na pregleden način obravnavati vprašanje izvajanja nadzora in mu pripisati nove prednostne naloge, zlasti ob upoštevanju poudarka, ki je bil zadnje čase namenjen zmanjšanju obsega zakonodajnih pobud.
It is the Committee's opinion that the Commission needs to give serious, visible consideration and a new priority to the question of implementation control, especially considering the emphasis given lately to the alleged urgency of diminishing the amount of legislative initiatives.
Kljub vedno manjšemu številu razpoložljivih virov je treba ponovno oceniti poudarek, ki ga dokumenti o upravljanju v letu 2001 pripisujejo sodelovanju z državami članicami, ob upoštevanju dejstva, da večina držav članic v zvezi s tem ni pripravljena veliko narediti.
Despite the decreasing resources available, it is important that the emphasis given in the Governance Papers in 2001 to the cooperation with Member States should be re-evaluated in light of the fact that most Member States are not ready to do much to this effect.
To se je nedvomno potrdilo med pogajanji o zadnjem Medinstitucionalnem sporazumu o bolje oblikovanih predpisih leta 2003, ko je Svet zavrnil vsako obvezo v zvezi s prenosom in izvajanjem evropske zakonodaje.
This was patently confirmed during the negotiations on the last Better Regulation Inter-institutional agreement in 2003, when Council refused any commitment in matters concerning transposition and implementation.
Odbor za pravne zadeve tudi meni, da ima EP v zvezi s tem pomembno vlogo pri podpori in spodbujanju Komisije, pri čemer se seveda ne sme vmešavati v njena izključna pooblastila.
It is also the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs that the EP has an important role to play in this respect, both to support and stimulate the Commission, without of course intruding in its exclusive prerogatives.
To bo od nas nedvomno zahtevalo, da svojo pozornost z zakonodajnega področja delno preusmerimo tudi v nadzor izvajanja.
This will certainly require from our side that we partly shift our attention from the legislative field to implementation control as well.
V okviru novega dialoga s Komisijo in Svetom o bolje oblikovanih predpisih bomo morali še enkrat poskusiti prepričati Svet, da bo v zvezi s tem prevzel odgovornost.
And in the framework of a new dialogue with Commission and Council on Better Regulation, we will have to try once again to convince the Council to take some responsibility in this respect.
21. poročilo o nadzoru uporabe prava Skupnosti
The 21st report on monitoring the application of community law
V 21. poročilu Komisije o nadzoru uporabe prava Skupnosti so opisane dejavnosti Komisije v zvezi z nadzorom uporabe prava Skupnosti v letu 2003.
The 21st report from the Commission on monitoring the application of Community law gives an account of the Commission's activities in connection with monitoring the application of Community law in 2003.
Nadzor uporabe prava Skupnosti pomeni predvsem:
Monitoring the application of Community law mainly consists of:
1) preverjanje, ali so države članice sprejele izvedbene nacionalne ukrepe in ali so jih v določenem roku sporočile Komisiji;
1) verifying if Member States have adopted implementing national measures and communicate them to the Commission within the prescribed time limit;
2) preverjanje skladnosti nacionalnih ukrepov za prenos z zakonodajo Skupnosti;
2) verifying the conformity of national transposition measures with Community legislation;
3) zagotavljanje dejanskega upoštevanja predpisov s strani zasebnih in javnih subjektov, teles in organov ( izvrševanje ).
3) ensuring the actual respect of the provisions by private and public entities, bodies and authorities ( enforcement ).
1) Sprejetje izvedbenih nacionalnih ukrepov in obveščanje o njih
1) Adoption and communication of national implementing measures
Število postopkov za primere, ko se izvedbeni nacionalni ukrepi ne sprejmejo in ne sporočijo , se je v primerjavi s številkami iz let 2001 in 2002 skoraj podvojilo.
The number of proceedings for failure to adopt and communicate national implementing measures has almost doubled compared to the figures of 2001 and 2002.
Statistični podatki za leto 2003 kažejo 92,1-odstotno povečanje v primerjavi s preteklim letom, s 607 primerov na 1 166.
The statistics for 2003 show an increase of 92.1% from the previous year, from 607 cases to 1,166.
Razen tega se zdi, da je neobveščanje stalna praksa med državami članicami: medtem ko so na drugih področjih neizpolnjevanja obveznosti v vedenju držav članic velike razlike, je neobveščanje glede ukrepov za prenos (in oblikovanja osnutkov tehničnih predpisov v skladu z Direktivo 98/34/ES) pri vseh državah približno enako.
The failure to notify seems, moreover, a consistent practice among Member States: whereas other areas of failure to fulfil obligations show enormous differences in the behaviour of Member States, the failure to notify transposition measures (and draft technical regulations under Directive 98/34/EC) is shared almost equally.