natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
– da ob upoštevanju vzajemnega vrednotenja, ki se že izvaja v okviru ukrepov, povezanih z bojem proti terorizmu in s sodelovanjem v okviru Schengena, določi kazalce in postopke, ki bodo omogočili vzpostavitev vzajemnega sistema vrednotenja kakovosti kazenskega sodišča držav članic;
– that it define indicators and procedures, taking due account of mutual evaluations already existing as part of measures to combat terrorism and in connection with Schengen cooperation, for the establishment of a mutual evaluation system on the quality of criminal justice in the Member States;
– da prenese te postopke in kazalce v enega ali več sklepov, ki bodo temeljili na členu 31 Pogodbe o Evropski uniji in izvajali načela sodne prakse sodišč v Strasbourgu in v Luxembourgu, kot tudi usmeritve Komisije za učinkovito pravosodje v Evropi;
– that it transpose these procedures and indicators in one or more decisions based on Article 31 of the Treaty on European Union implementing the principles contained in the case law of the Strasbourg and Luxembourg Courts and the guidelines laid down by the Commission in relation to the effectiveness of justice in Europe;
Poročilo s predlogom priporočila Evropskega parlamenta Svetu o kakovosti kazenskega sodstva in usklajenosti kazenske zakonodaje v državah članicah
Report with a proposal for a European Parliament recommendation to the Council on the quality of criminal justice and the harmonisation of criminal law in the Member States
Obravnavani predlog(-i) priporočila
Proposal(s) for recommendation(s) considered
člena 114(3) in 83(5)
Rules 114(3) and 83(5)
Datum razglasitve odločitve za pripravo poročila
Date of decision to draw up report
Drugi predlog(-i) resolucije, vključen(-i) v poročilo
Other proposal(s) for recommendation(s) included in report
Številka B6
Number B6
Odbor(-i), zaprošeni za mnenje
Committee(s) asked for opinion(s)
o predlogu Sklepa Sveta ki pooblašča države članice, da v interesu Evropske skupnosti ratificirajo konvencijo Mednarodne organizacije dela o osebnih dokumentih pomorščakov (Konvencija št. 185)
on the proposal for a Council decision on authorising Member States to ratify in the interests of the Community the Seafarers' Identity Documents Convention of the International Labour Organization (Convention 185)
– ob upoštevanju predloga sklepa Sveta ( KOM(2004)0530 )
– having regard to the Commission proposal ( COM(2004)0530 )
– ob upoštevanju člena 62(2)(b) in (i) in člena 300(2), prvi pododstavek, prvi stavek Pogodbe ES,
– having regard to Article 62(2)(b)(i) and Article 300(2), first subparagraph, first sentence of the EC Treaty,
– ob upoštevanju prvega pododstavka člena 300(3) Pogodbe ES, v skladu s katerim se je Svet posvetoval s Parlamentom ( C6‑0167/2004 ),
– having regard to Article 300(3), first subparagraph, of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament ( C6-0167/2004 ),
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za svoboščine in pravice državljanov, pravosodje in notranje zadeve ( A6‑0037/2005 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs ( A6-0037/2005 ),
International Labour Organisation Convention No 185
International Labour Organisation Convention No 185
To achieve that objective, the Convention lays down certain rules on visas for seafarers taking shore leave.
To achieve that objective, the Convention lays down certain rules on visas for seafarers taking shore leave.
The Convention also refers to the entry of seafarers into Member States’ territory, in particular in the event of transit, transfer or repatriation.
The Convention also refers to the entry of seafarers into Member States’ territory, in particular in the event of transit, transfer or repatriation.
Its ultimate objective is flexibility and security, notably through the introduction of biometric data.
Its ultimate objective is flexibility and security, notably through the introduction of biometric data.
The Convention was adopted by the Member States on 19 June 2003 at the General Conference of the ILO.
The Convention was adopted by the Member States on 19 June 2003 at the General Conference of the ILO.
The Commission took part in the negotiations as an observer, though only the Member States may accede to the Convention.
The Commission took part in the negotiations as an observer, though only the Member States may accede to the Convention.
Three countries have ratified the Convention to date: France on 27 April 2004, Jordan on 8 August 2004, and Nigeria on 18 August 2004.
Three countries have ratified the Convention to date: France on 27 April 2004, Jordan on 8 August 2004, and Nigeria on 18 August 2004.
Subject of the proposal for a Council Decision
Subject of the proposal for a Council Decision
According to Title IV of the EC Treaty entitled ‘ Visas, asylum, immigration and other policies related to free movement of persons’ , policy on visas, of both short and long duration, falls within the Community’s competence.
According to Title IV of the EC Treaty entitled ‘ Visas, asylum, immigration and other policies related to free movement of persons’ , policy on visas, of both short and long duration, falls within the Community’s competence.
Article 62(2)(b)(i) establishes, in particular, that measures concerning the list of third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that requirement fall within the competence of the European Community.
Article 62(2)(b)(i) establishes, in particular, that measures concerning the list of third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that requirement fall within the competence of the European Community.
Article 6(6) of the revised ILO Convention, which provides that ‘ For the purpose of shore leave seafarers shall not be required to hold a visa ’, incontestably falls within the scope of Title IV of the Treaty.
Article 6(6) of the revised ILO Convention, which provides that ‘ For the purpose of shore leave seafarers shall not be required to hold a visa ’, incontestably falls within the scope of Title IV of the Treaty.
However, following the Court of Justice’s judgment on the AETR (European Agreement Concerning the Work of Crews of Vehicles Engaged in International Road Transport ) concerning external competences where the Community has already exercised a competence conferred on it by the Treaty, Member States are no longer free, on their own initiative, to ratify an international agreement which concerns those competences.
However, following the Court of Justice’s judgment on the AETR (European Agreement Concerning the Work of Crews of Vehicles Engaged in International Road Transport ) concerning external competences where the Community has already exercised a competence conferred on it by the Treaty, Member States are no longer free, on their own initiative, to ratify an international agreement which concerns those competences.
In the case in question, the Community has already exercised its competence in this field by adopting Council Regulation (EC) No 539/001 of 15 March 2001
In the case in question, the Community has already exercised its competence in this field by adopting Council Regulation (EC) No 539/001 of 15 March 2001
453/2003 of 6 March 2003. listing the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that requirement.
453/2003 of 6 March 2003. listing the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that requirement.
For that reason, the Commission proposes that the Council should authorise those Member States which are bound by Community rules in this particular area to ratify the Convention in the interests of the Community.
For that reason, the Commission proposes that the Council should authorise those Member States which are bound by Community rules in this particular area to ratify the Convention in the interests of the Community.
Your rapporteur fully endorses the objective of the Convention.
Your rapporteur fully endorses the objective of the Convention.
Nevertheless, after having reviewed the matter, he would make two specific observations.
Nevertheless, after having reviewed the matter, he would make two specific observations.
The first is that although the Convention touches on the visa requirement, since Article 6(6) thereof stipulates that ' For the purpose of shore leave seafarers shall not be required to hold a visa ' it does not entail any amendment of the corresponding Community instrument.
The first is that although the Convention touches on the visa requirement, since Article 6(6) thereof stipulates that ' For the purpose of shore leave seafarers shall not be required to hold a visa ' it does not entail any amendment of the corresponding Community instrument.
The instrument in question, namely Council Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 of 15 March 2001 listing the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that requirement expressly states in Article 4(1)(b) that ‘ A Member State may provide for exceptions from the visa requirement […] as regards […] (b) civilian air and sea crew ’.
The instrument in question, namely Council Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 of 15 March 2001 listing the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that requirement expressly states in Article 4(1)(b) that ‘ A Member State may provide for exceptions from the visa requirement […] as regards […] (b) civilian air and sea crew ’.
The question which your rapporteur poses is whether, under these circumstances, Member States actually need the Council’s authorisation to ratify ILO Convention No 185.
The question which your rapporteur poses is whether, under these circumstances, Member States actually need the Council’s authorisation to ratify ILO Convention No 185.
France clearly does not share that view since it has decided on its own initiative to ratify the Convention, which will enter into force in February 2005
France clearly does not share that view since it has decided on its own initiative to ratify the Convention, which will enter into force in February 2005
Article 12 of the Convention states:
Article 12 of the Convention states:
It shall come into force six months after the date on which the ratifications of two Members have been registered with the Director-General.’ .
It shall come into force six months after the date on which the ratifications of two Members have been registered with the Director-General.’ .
In any case, the symbolic value which the Commission would like to confer on such authorisation, and which would be strengthened by simultaneous ratification by all the Member States, confirming in the eyes of the rest of the world ‘the importance the Community attaches to the Convention’
In any case, the symbolic value which the Commission would like to confer on such authorisation, and which would be strengthened by simultaneous ratification by all the Member States, confirming in the eyes of the rest of the world ‘the importance the Community attaches to the Convention’
See COM(2004)530 final, Explanatory Memorandum, paragraphs 17 and 23. , has now been greatly diminished as the Council has decided to remove Article 2 of its Decision.
See COM(2004)530 final, Explanatory Memorandum, paragraphs 17 and 23. , has now been greatly diminished as the Council has decided to remove Article 2 of its Decision.
Secondly, your rapporteur can only express his surprise at the decision taken a year ago to enter biometric data on seafarers’ identity cards.
Secondly, your rapporteur can only express his surprise at the decision taken a year ago to enter biometric data on seafarers’ identity cards.
This issue has given rise to numerous questions and continues to do so.
This issue has given rise to numerous questions and continues to do so.
Article 3(8) of the Convention stipulates that seafarers’ identity documents shall include, in addition to particulars such as name, sex, date and place of birth, nationality, special physical characteristics, a digital or original photograph and signature, ‘ a template or other representation of a biometric of the holder which meets the specification provided for in Annex I.’
Article 3(8) of the Convention stipulates that seafarers’ identity documents shall include, in addition to particulars such as name, sex, date and place of birth, nationality, special physical characteristics, a digital or original photograph and signature, ‘ a template or other representation of a biometric of the holder which meets the specification provided for in Annex I.’
Annex I then defines this template for seafarers’ identity documents.
Annex I then defines this template for seafarers’ identity documents.
As regards the biometric data, the model chosen is a ‘ biometric template based on a fingerprint printed as numbers in a bar code conforming to a standard to be developed .’
As regards the biometric data, the model chosen is a ‘ biometric template based on a fingerprint printed as numbers in a bar code conforming to a standard to be developed .’
Annex I, III (k) of Convention No 185.
Annex I, III (k) of Convention No 185.
However, in a document published in November last by the committee set up under Article 6 of Regulation 1683/95 laying down a uniform format for visas, your rapporteur read on the subject of the practical feasibility of including biometric identifiers in standardised visas and residence permits for third country nationals and in passports and travel documents issued by the Member States, that ‘ owing to its limited storage capacity, the bar code does not comply with International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) standards ’, which constitute the reference point on that subject.
However, in a document published in November last by the committee set up under Article 6 of Regulation 1683/95 laying down a uniform format for visas, your rapporteur read on the subject of the practical feasibility of including biometric identifiers in standardised visas and residence permits for third country nationals and in passports and travel documents issued by the Member States, that ‘ owing to its limited storage capacity, the bar code does not comply with International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) standards ’, which constitute the reference point on that subject.
Moreover, a note from the delegation of a Member State to the working party on visas draws attention to the fact that the biometric rules applied to seafarers’ identity documents, as conceived by the International Labour Organisation, are not consistent with ICAO standards, which had already been clearly established by ICAO’s technical advisory group in Montreal in May 2004.
Moreover, a note from the delegation of a Member State to the working party on visas draws attention to the fact that the biometric rules applied to seafarers’ identity documents, as conceived by the International Labour Organisation, are not consistent with ICAO standards, which had already been clearly established by ICAO’s technical advisory group in Montreal in May 2004.
However, in the ‘ proposal for a regulation laying down standards for security features and the use of biometric data in passports and other travel documents issued by Member States’ , the Council points out that the ICAO’s specifications, in particular those contained in document 9303 concerning machine readable travel documents, will have to be taken into account.
However, in the ‘ proposal for a regulation laying down standards for security features and the use of biometric data in passports and other travel documents issued by Member States’ , the Council points out that the ICAO’s specifications, in particular those contained in document 9303 concerning machine readable travel documents, will have to be taken into account.
It would appear, therefore, that there is a gap, at the technical level, between the rules applied to seafarers’ identity documents on the basis of the ILO Convention and the rules applied to travel documents issued by Member States.
It would appear, therefore, that there is a gap, at the technical level, between the rules applied to seafarers’ identity documents on the basis of the ILO Convention and the rules applied to travel documents issued by Member States.
This difference would logically entail having different equipment to manufacture and read one or other type of document.
This difference would logically entail having different equipment to manufacture and read one or other type of document.
Your rapporteur would query the advisability of such measures as well as their financial implications.
Your rapporteur would query the advisability of such measures as well as their financial implications.
In his view, greater coherence would be desirable in such a complex and sensitive area.
In his view, greater coherence would be desirable in such a complex and sensitive area.
Nevertheless, it is the Member States which bear responsibility for carrying out their obligations and assuming the financial implications of their decisions.
Nevertheless, it is the Member States which bear responsibility for carrying out their obligations and assuming the financial implications of their decisions.
On that point, therefore, your rapporteur sees no obstacle to ratification of the Convention.
On that point, therefore, your rapporteur sees no obstacle to ratification of the Convention.
Predlog Sklepa Sveta ki pooblašča države članice, da v interesu Evropske skupnosti ratificirajo konvencijo Mednarodne organizacije dela o osebnih dokumentih pomorščakov (Konvencija št. 185)
Proposal for a Council decision on authorising Member States to ratify in the interests of the Community the Seafarers' Identity Documents Convention of the International Labour Organization (Convention 185)
Odbori, ki niso dali mnenja datum sklepa
Not delivering opinions Date of decision
Posvetovanje z Ekonomsko-socialnim odborom Datum sklepa na zasedanju
Economic and Social Committee consulted Date of decision in plenary
o predlogu direktive Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o dovoljenju Skupnosti za delo kontrolorja zračnega prometa
on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Community Air Traffic Controller Licence
OSNUTEK ZAKONODAJNE RESOLUCIJE EVROPSKEGA PARLAMENTA......................5
DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION..........................................5
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu ( KOM(2004)0473 )
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council ( COM(2004)0473 )
UL C ... / Še ni bilo objavljeno v UL. ,
OJ C ... / Not yet published in OJ. ,
– ob upoštevanju člena 251(2) in člena 80(2) Pogodbe ES, na podlagi katerih je Komisija Parlamentu podala predlog ( C6‑0076/2004 ),
– having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 80(2) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament ( C6‑0076/2004 ),
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za promet in turizem ( A6‑0038/2005 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism ( A6‑0038/2005 ),
(1) Izvajanje regulative Enotno evropsko nebo zahteva vzpostavitev podrobnejše zakonodaje, zlasti o določilih v zvezi z izdajanjem dovoljenj za kontrolorje zračnega prometa, da bi povečali njihovo razpoložljivost in spodbudili vzajemno priznavanje dovoljenj, kot predvideva člen 5 Uredbe (ES) št. 550/2004 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 10. marca 2004 o izvajanju navigacijskih služb zračnega prometa na enotnem evropskem nebu (Uredba o izvajanju služb).
(1) Implementation of the Single European Sky legislation requires the establishment of more detailed legislation, in particular on arrangements concerning the licensing of air traffic controllers, in order to improve their availability and to promote the mutual recognition of licences, as foreseen in Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 550/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2004 on the provision of air navigation services in the single European sky (the service provision Regulation)
(1) Izvajanje regulative Enotno evropsko nebo zahteva vzpostavitev podrobnejše zakonodaje, zlasti o določilih v zvezi z izdajanjem dovoljenj za kontrolorje zračnega prometa, da bi zagotovili višje standarde odgovornosti in pristojnosti , povečali razpoložljivost kontrolorjev zračnega prometa in spodbudili vzajemno priznavanje dovoljenj, kot predvideva člen 5 Uredbe (ES) št. 550/2004 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 10. marca 2004 o izvajanju navigacijskih služb zračnega prometa na enotnem evropskem nebu (Uredba o izvajanju služb), ob prizadevanju za splošno izboljšanje varnosti zračnega prometa in usposobljenosti osebja.
(1) Implementation of the Single European Sky legislation requires the establishment of more detailed legislation, in particular on arrangements concerning the licensing of air traffic controllers, in order to ensure the highest standards of responsibility and competence, to improve the availability of air traffic controllers and to promote the mutual recognition of licences, as foreseen in Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 550/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2004 on the provision of air navigation services in the single European sky (the service provision Regulation) while pursuing the objective of an overall improvement in air traffic safety and competence of personnel.
Tesna povezava med varnostjo v zraku in sposobnostmi kontrolorjev zračnega prometa je razvidna iz vrste letalskih nesreč.
The close link between air safety and the competence of air traffic controllers has become apparent following a series of plane crashes.
Omeniti je treba tudi, da tretja uvodna izjava okvirne uredbe o enotnem evropskem nebu zahteva najvišje standarde za odgovornost in sposobnost.
It should also be remembered that recital 3 of the Single European Sky Framework Regulation calls for the highest standards of responsibility and competence.
Cilj te direktive ne sme biti le spodbujanje mobilnosti in razpoložljivosti kontrolorjev zračnega prometa.
The objective of this directive must not be merely to promote mobility and availability of air traffic control personnel.
Na podlagi regulative Enotno evropsko nebo je varnost izredno pomembna.
As in the framework of the Single Sky legislation, safety is of the utmost importance.
Neprestano izboljševanje usposobljenosti osebja mora biti bistveno.
The core issue must be constant improvement of the competence of personnel.
(3a) Glede na analize zadnjih letalskih nesreč je varnost odvisna od zanesljivosti vsakega elementa v verigi upravljanja varnosti zračnega prometa (UVZP).
(3a) As demonstrated by the analyses of recent air accidents, safety is dependent upon the reliability of every element of the air traffic management (ATM) safety chain.
To pomeni, da je treba usposobljenost osebja, ki dela na tem področju, spremljati bolj učinkovito.
This implies that the competence of personnel working in this area must be monitored in a more efficient way.
V skladu z izvajanjem te direktive bi Skupnost morala začeti s pobudo za urejanje sistema za izdajo dovoljenj in kvalifikacijskega sistema za poklice s področja upravljanja varnosti zračnega prometa.
Following implementation of this Directive, the Community should launch an initiative aimed at regulating the licensing and qualification system for ATM safety chain professions.
Uvodna izjava 5 a (novo)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) S sistemom izdajanja dovoljenj se zagotovi, da so kontrolorji zračnega prometa, ki imajo dovoljenja, ustrezno izšolani o tehnikah varnostnega in kriznega upravljanja.
(5a) The Community licencing scheme should ensure that licenced controllers are sufficiently trained in safety, security and crisis management techniques.