natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
P. ker so Konvencijo, ki uvaja nalog za prijetje, 15. decembra 2005 podpisale Danska, Finska, Islandija, Švedska in Norveška; ker kljub temu, da temelji na načelih in strukturi evropskega naloga za prijetje, nordijski nalog za prijetje v primerjavi z evropskim vsebuje več smernic, s tem da organizira bolj učinkovito shemo izročitve, še posebej zaradi: zmanjšanega števila poljubnih motivov za neizvajanje; še skrajšanih postopkovnih rokov glede na roke, predvidene za evropski nalog za prijetje; ker se bo lahko Evropska unija koristno zgledovala po nordijskem nalogu in na ta način povečala učinkovitost evropskega naloga za prijetje,
P. whereas the Convention establishing a Nordic arrest warrant was signed on 15 December 2005 by Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Sweden and Norway; whereas, although it is based on the principles and structure of the European arrest warrant, the Nordic arrest warrant integrates a number of advances on it, with a more effective set of rules on surrender, thanks, notably, to the reduction in the number of optional grounds for non-execution and to procedural deadlines that are shorter than those for the European arrest warrant; whereas the EU could usefully take inspiration from the Nordic arrest warrant to improve the effectiveness of the European arrest warrant,
Prenos in praktična izvedba
Transposition and implementation in practice
a) kar najhitreje sprejeti predlog okvirnega sklepa o nekaterih postopkovnih pravicah pri kazenskih postopkih v Evropski uniji, pri čemer naj se upoštevajo spremembe, ki jih je Evropski parlament predlagal v stališču 12. aprila 2005
(a) adopt, as soon as possible, the proposal for a framework decision on certain procedural rights in criminal proceedings throughout the European Union, taking account of Parliament's amendments in its position of 12 April 2005
b) zagotoviti, da države članice pri prenosu okvirnega sklepa ne bi ponovno uvedle sistematičnega nadzora dvojne kaznivosti za svoje državljane, saj to škoduje učinkovitosti evropskega naloga za prijetje in slabi načelo medsebojnega zaupanja med državami članicami;
(b) ensure that, in the transposition of framework decision 2002/584/JHA, Member States do not reinstate systematic checks regarding double jeopardy for their nationals, as this would undermine both the effectiveness of the European arrest warrant and the principle of mutual trust between Member States;
c) zagotoviti, da se v postopek izvedbe evropskega naloga za prijetje ne bodo vmešavali politični organi, saj je tovrstno vmešavanje oteževalo postopek izročitve; opozarja, da osrednje oblasti odslej ne bi smele več prekoračiti svojih pristojnosti in bi morale izključno nastopati kot pomoč v postopku predaje osumljenih ali obsojenih oseb;
(c) ensure that no political authority can interfere in the procedure of implementation of the European arrest warrant, in the fashion that created problems for the extradition procedure; recalls that in future the central authority should not go beyond its role of facilitator of the process of surrender of suspects or sentenced persons;
d) paziti, da se odpravijo težave, ki v nekaterih državah članicah vztrajno nastopajo pri izvajanju ratione temporis okvirnega sklepa 2002/584/JAI, in tako preprečiti, da bi te težave škodovale njegovemu pravilnemu izvajanju v drugih državah članicah;
(d) ensure that the difficulties persisting in some Member States over the application ratione temporis of framework decision 2002/584/JHA are resolved and that they do not affect its implementation by those Member States which have thus far been applying it correctly;
e) paziti, da države članice nemudoma sprejmejo ukrepe, ki odpravljajo vse ovire, ustavne ali pravne, za uporabo evropskega naloga za prijetje za svoje prebivalce;
(e) ensure that the Member States take, without delay, the appropriate measures so as to avoid any constitutional or legal obstacles to the application of the European Arrest Warrant to their nationals,
f) predvideti, da Svet predloži Evropskemu parlamentu letno poročilo o ukrepih, priporočenih v točkah b), c) d) in e), ki jih je sprejel, da države članice spodbudi k pravilnemu prenosu in učinkovitemu izvajanju evropskega naloga za prijetje,
(f) provide for the Council to submit an annual report to Parliament on the measures it has taken to encourage Member States to ensure the proper transposition and effective implementation of the European arrest warrant, as recommended in (b), (c), (d) and (e) above,
g) v okviru pristojnosti obeh proračunskih organov skupaj s Parlamentom predvideti ustrezna proračunska sredstva, ki bodo Komisiji kot varuhu pogodb omogočala, da skrbno nadzoruje kakovost prenosa;
(g) ensure with Parliament, in the context of the powers of the two branches of the budgetary authority, that the Commission, in its capacity as guardian of the Treaties, has the resources needed for the detailed monitoring of the quality of transposition;
h) ob pomoči Komisije in na usklajen način voditi objektivno, nepristransko in bolj poglobljeno oceno težav, s katerimi se pri svojem delu srečujejo vsi, ki v državah članicah delujejo na področju sodne prakse, in jo dopolniti z oceno kakovosti na osnovi razčlenitve evropskih nalogov za prijetje glede na vrsto kršitve;
(h) undertake, with the Commission's support and in coordinated fashion, an objective, impartial and more detailed evaluation of the problems encountered by legal professionals in the various Member States, backing it up with a qualitative assessment arrived at via a breakdown of the European arrest warrants by type of offence;
i) izogniti se vzporednim raziskavam na to temo, četudi bi Svet, ker gre za ukrep "tretjega stebra" (naslov VI Pogodbe o Evropski uniji), hotel izvesti lastno raziskavo;
(i) avoid a proliferation of parallel research activities on the same subject, even if the Council is tempted to carry out its own study, on the grounds that this is a third-pillar measure (Title VI of the Treaty on European Union);
j) redno obveščati Evropski in nacionalne parlamente o doseženem napredku pri izvajanju evropskega naloga za prijetje ter se z njimi o tej tematiki posvetovati; poskrbeti, da Evropski in nacionalni parlamenti sodelujejo pri njegovi oceni, kot to določa člen III-260 osnutka Pogodbe o Ustavi za Evropo;
(j) undertake the regular information and consultation of the European Parliament and the national parliaments on the progress achieved in the implementation of the European arrest warrant, involving them in the evaluation process in the spirit of Article III-260 of the Draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe;
k) paziti, da države članice ob prenosu okvirnega sklepa ne naložijo sodniku, ki izvaja evropski nalog za prijetje, da sistematično nadzoruje njegovo usklajenost s temeljnimi pravicami, ker bi to lahko privedlo do diskriminacije, saj mehanizem temelji na načelu vzajemnega priznavanja in ker že država članica, ki izda nalog, izvaja ta nadzor,
(k) ensure that the Member States, when transposing the framework decision, do not insist that the judge executing a European arrest warrant has systematically to verify its compatibility with fundamental rights, since this would entail the risk of discrimination regarding a mechanism that is grounded in the principle of mutual recognition;
l) posebno pozornost nameniti vprašanju spoštovanja človekovih pravic in svoboščin posameznika pri uporabi evropskega naloga za prijetje, nalogi, pri kateri bo morala sodelovati prihodnja agencija za temeljne pravice;
(l) pay close attention to the issue of respect for human rights and individual freedoms in the implementation of the European arrest warrant, a task to which the proposed Agency for Fundamental Rights should be asked to contribute;
Učinkovitost in demokracija
Effectiveness and democracy
m) kar najhitreje aktivirati povezavo iz člena 42 Pogodbe o Evropski uniji, ki v svojem "prvem stebru" vključuje tudi evropski nalog za prijetje, s čimer bi sprejetim ukrepom v okviru evropskega sodnega prostora povsem zagotovili demokratični značaj in povečali njegovo učinkovitost;
(m) ensure the rapid activation of the 'passerelle' provided for in Article 42 of the EU Treaty, thus bringing the European arrest warrant under the first pillar, so as to confer a fully democratic character and greater effectiveness on the measures taken for the European judicial area;
In submitting, on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, this recommendation on the evaluation of the European arrest warrant, I have, as your rapporteur, grounded my arguments in the findings presented by the Commission in its report based on Article 34 of the Council framework decision of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the relevant procedures.
In submitting, on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, this recommendation on the evaluation of the European arrest warrant, I have, as your rapporteur, grounded my arguments in the findings presented by the Commission in its report based on Article 34 of the Council framework decision of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the relevant procedures.
I shall not here repeat the detailed remarks set out in the two working documents submitted earlier.
I shall not here repeat the detailed remarks set out in the two working documents submitted earlier.
PE 362.745 and PE 362.744 .
PE 362.745 and PE 362.744 .
The parliamentary meeting held in Brussels on 17 and 18 October
The parliamentary meeting held in Brussels on 17 and 18 October
http://www.europarl.eu.int/comparl/libe/elsj/events/hearings/20051017/default_en.htm , with the participation of almost a hundred members of the Union's parliaments and members of LIBE, made it possible, at a special session on the European arrest warrant, to examine its state of implementation in the different Member States.
http://www.europarl.eu.int/comparl/libe/elsj/events/hearings/20051017/default_en.htm , with the participation of almost a hundred members of the Union's parliaments and members of LIBE, made it possible, at a special session on the European arrest warrant, to examine its state of implementation in the different Member States.
It emerged from the debates that advances have been made on the traditional extradition model but that there are still numerous obstacles, arising from either dubious transposition formulas - some of them validated by constitutional checks on the national transposition laws - or from the practicalities of application.
It emerged from the debates that advances have been made on the traditional extradition model but that there are still numerous obstacles, arising from either dubious transposition formulas - some of them validated by constitutional checks on the national transposition laws - or from the practicalities of application.
On the basis of the available data and of additional information received from Member States, professional organisations and NGOs, and in the light of the debates held at the parliamentary meeting, your rapporteur submits the recommendations included in this report for the approval of the LIBE committee and of Parliament.
On the basis of the available data and of additional information received from Member States, professional organisations and NGOs, and in the light of the debates held at the parliamentary meeting, your rapporteur submits the recommendations included in this report for the approval of the LIBE committee and of Parliament.
Your rapporteur awaits with interest the up-to-date evaluations which the Commission has still to submit for Italy and also for all the Member States in 2006, and hopes that they will contain more detailed qualitative information than that available at the present stage.
Your rapporteur awaits with interest the up-to-date evaluations which the Commission has still to submit for Italy and also for all the Member States in 2006, and hopes that they will contain more detailed qualitative information than that available at the present stage.
PREDLOG PRIPOROČILA SVETU ( B6‑0455/2005 )
DRAFT RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL ( B6‑0455/2005 )
v skladu s členom 114, odstavek 1, Poslovnika,
pursuant to Rule 114(1) of the Rules of Procedure
ki ga vlaga Adeline Hazan
by Adeline Hazan
– ob upoštevanju okvirnega sklepa z dne 13. junija 2002 o evropskem nalogu za prijetje in postopkih predaje med državami članicami,
– having regard to the framework decision of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States,
– ob upoštevanju poročila Komisije (KOM 2005/63) na podlagi člena 34 Okvirnega sklepa Sveta z dne 13. junija 2002 o evropskem nalogu za prijetje in postopkih predaje med državami članicami,
– having regard to the Commission report ( COM(2005)0063 ) based on Article 34 of the Council framework decision of 13 June 2002,
– ob upoštevanju nedavnih razsodb ustavnih sodišč Poljske in Nemčije,
– having regard to the recent judgments of the Constitutional Courts of Poland and Germany,
a) zagotoviti je treba, da države članice pri prenosu okvirnega sklepa ne bi ponovno uvedle sistematičnega nadzora dvojne kaznivosti za svoje državljane, saj to škoduje učinkovitosti evropskega naloga za prijetje in slabi načelo medsebojnega zaupanja med državami članicami;
(a) that it should ensure that in transposing the framework decision the Member States do not reintroduce systematic verification of double criminality for their nationals, since this reduces the effectiveness of the European arrest warrant and poses a threat to the principle of mutual confidence between the Member States;
b) nameniti je treba pozornost dejstvu, da neenotno izvajanje evropskega naloga za prijetje (npr. v primeru, če vse države ne bi prenesle uvodnih izjav 12 in 13 o temeljnih pravicah) lahko privede do diskriminacije, če bi se sodnik države, v kateri poteka izvršitev, odločil ugotavljati skladnost evropskega naloga za prijetje s temeljnimi pravicami, čeprav besedilo temelji na načelu vzajemnega priznavanja;
(b) that it should pay particular attention to the fact that non-uniform implementation of the European arrest warrant (failure of some States to transpose recitals 12 and 13 on fundamental rights) could create discrimination, depending on whether or not the judge in the State of implementation must verify consistency of the European arrest warrant with fundamental rights, whereas the nature of the text is based on the principle of mutual recognition;
c) zamisliti se je treba nad določeno mero vztrajnega vmešavanja političnih oblasti v postopek izvedbe evropskega naloga za prijetje, saj je vmešavanje povzročalo težave v postopku izročitve, čeprav naj bi bila vloga osrednje oblasti izključno pomoč v postopku predaje osumljenih ali obsojenih oseb;
(c) that it should be concerned by the continuation of a certain level of interference by the political authorities in the European arrest warrant procedure, which caused a problem in the extradition procedure, whereas in this case the central authority must not go beyond its role of facilitator in the procedure of surrender of suspects or individuals already sentenced;
d) upoštevati je treba dejstvo, da v nekaterih državah članicah še vedno obstajajo težave pri izvajanju ratione temporis okvirnega sklepa in da dejansko to lahko povzroči težave pri njegovem izvajanju v državah, ki ga izvajajo pravilno;
(d) that it should take account of the fact that there are continuing difficulties in some Member States in the application ratione temporis of the framework decision, with a resulting risk of problems in its implementation by other Member States which are applying the framework decision correctly;
e) poskrbeti je treba, da se izvaja redno posvetovanje z Evropskim parlamentom o doseženem napredku pri izvajanju evropskega naloga za prijetje;
(e) that it should ensure that the European Parliament is regularly consulted on progress in implementing the European arrest warrant;
f) poskrbeti je treba, da se izvaja poglobljeno, objektivno in nepristransko ovrednotenje težav, s katerimi se pri svojem konkretnem delu srečujejo vsi, ki delujejo na področju sodne prakse;
(f) that it should ensure that a more thorough, objective and impartial evaluation of the difficulties encountered by judicial authorities on the ground is carried out;
g) v prihodnje je treba razmisliti o možnem ponovnem pregledu okvirnega sklepa in dopolnitvi seznama 32 kaznivih dejanj, pri katerih se dvojna kaznivost ne preverja;
(g) that it should think about the possibility in future of revising the framework decision with a view to extending the list of 32 categories of offence for which double criminality is not verified;
h) poskrbeti je treba, da se vprašanju spoštovanja človekovih pravic in svoboščin posameznika pri izvajanju evropskega naloga za prijetje nameni posebna pozornost;
(h) that it should ensure that the issue of respect for human rights and individual freedoms is paid particular attention in applying the European arrest warrant;
Predlog priporočila Evropskega parlamenta Svetu o oceni evropskega naloga za prijetje
Proposal for a European Parliament recommendation to the Council on evaluation of the European arrest warrant
Pravna podlaga v Poslovniku
Legal basis
člen 114(3)
Rule 114(3)
OBRAVNAVANI PREDLOG(-I) PRIPOROČILA
PROPOSAL(S) FOR RECOMMENDATION(S) CONSIDERED
Odbori, zaprošeni za mnenje
Committee(s) asked for opinions
B6-0455/2005 Adeline Hazan v imenu skupine PSE Ocena evropskega naloga za prijetje LIBE 1.9.2005
B6-0455/2005 Adeline Hazan on behalf of the PSE Group Evaluation of the European arrest warrant LIBE 1.9.2005
o predlogu Direktive Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o spremembi Direktive Sveta 77/91/EGS glede ustanavljanja delniških družb ter ohranjanja in spreminjanja njihovega kapitala
on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 77/91/EEC, as regards the formation of public limited liability companies and the maintenance and alteration of their capital
MNENJE Odbora za ekonomske in monetarne zadeve ..................................20
OPINION of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs ............33
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu ( KOM(2004)0730 )
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council ( COM(2004)0730 )
– ob upoštevanju členov 251(2) in 44(1) Pogodbe ES, na podlagi katerih je Komisija predlog predložila Parlamentu ( C6‑0169/2004 ),
– having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 44(1) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament ( C6‑0169/2004 ),
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za pravne zadeve in mnenja Odbora za ekonomske in monetarne zadeve ( A6–0050/2006 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs ( A6‑0050/2006 ),
(2) Komisija v sporočilu Svetu in Evropskemu parlamentu „Posodabljanje prava družb in izboljšanje upravljanja podjetij v Evropski uniji – načrt za napredek“ z dne 21. maja 2003 ugotavlja, da bi poenostavitev Direktive 77/91 pomembno prispevala k pospeševanju poslovne učinkovitosti in konkurenčnosti brez zmanjšanja zaščite delničarjev in upnikov.
(2) In its Communication to the Council and the European Parliament “Modernising Company Law and Enhancing Corporate Governance in the European Union – A Plan to Move Forward” of 21 May 2003 the Commission draws the conclusion that a simplification of the Directive 77/91/EEC would significantly contribute to the promotion of business efficiency and competitiveness without reducing the protection offered to shareholders and creditors.
(2) Komisija v sporočilu Svetu in Evropskemu parlamentu „Posodabljanje prava družb in izboljšanje upravljanja podjetij v Evropski uniji – načrt za napredek“ z dne 21. maja 2003 ugotavlja, da bi poenostavitev in posodobitev Direktive 77/91 pomembno prispevala k pospeševanju poslovne učinkovitosti in konkurenčnosti brez zmanjšanja zaščite delničarjev in upnikov.
(2) In its Communication to the Council and the European Parliament “Modernising Company Law and Enhancing Corporate Governance in the European Union – A Plan to Move Forward” of 21 May 2003 the Commission draws the conclusion that a simplification and modernisation of the Directive 77/91/EEC would significantly contribute to the promotion of business efficiency and competitiveness without reducing the protection offered to shareholders and creditors.
Ti cilji imajo prednost, vendar ne vplivajo na potrebo po takojšnjem splošnem pregledu izvedljivosti alternativ režimu ohranjanja kapitala, ki bi ustrezno zaščitile interese upnikov in delničarjev delniške družbe.
Those objectives have first priority but do not affect the need to proceed without delay to a general examination of the feasibility of alternatives to the capital maintenance regime which would adequately protect the interests of creditors and of shareholders of a public limited liability company.
(5) Delniškim družbam bi moralo biti omogočeno, da odobrijo finančno pomoč za pridobitev lastnih delnic s strani tretjih strank do omejitve razdeljivih rezerv podjetja, saj omogoča to prilagodljivost v zvezi s spremembami v lastniški strukturi delniškega kapitala družb.
(5) Public limited liability companies should be able to grant financial assistance with a view to the acquisition of their shares by a third party up to the limit of the company’s distributable reserves so as to increase flexibility with regard to changes in the ownership structure of the share capital of companies.
Za to možnost morajo obstajati zaščitni ukrepi, ki so plod cilja Direktive za zaščito delničarjev in tretjih strank.
This possibility should be subject to safeguards imposed by the Directive’s objective of protection of both shareholders and third parties.
(5) Državam članicam bi moralo biti omogočeno, da dovolijo delniškim družbam odobritev finančne pomoči za pridobitev lastnih delnic s strani tretjih strank do omejitve razdeljivih rezerv podjetja, saj omogoča to prilagodljivost v zvezi s spremembami v lastniški strukturi delniškega kapitala družb.
(5) It should be open to Member States to permit public limited liability companies to grant financial assistance with a view to the acquisition of their shares by a third party up to the limit of the company’s distributable reserves so as to increase flexibility with regard to changes in the ownership structure of the share capital of companies.
(8) Delničarji, ki imajo v lasti veliko večino kapitala delniške družbe, bi morali imeti pravico do pridobitve preostalih delnic za primerno nadomestilo, kar bi omogočalo usmerjeno in bolj izvedljivo lastništvo delnic v družbah, ki kotirajo na borzi.
(8) Shareholders holding a large majority of a public limited liability company’s capital should have the right to acquire the remaining shares for adequate compensation, so as to enable a streamlined and more viable share ownership in listed companies.
Taka pravica pridobitve pa bi morala pripadati tudi v takem primeru preostalim delničarjem.
Likewise, in such a situation, the remaining shareholders should be able to require such acquisition.
Vendar pa te pravice ne smejo vplivati na veljavna pravila v skladu z Direktivo 2004/25/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 21. aprila o ponudbah za prevzem večinskega deleža družbe.
Nonetheless, the rules applicable according to the Directive 2004/25/EC6 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on takeover bids should not be affected by those rights.
Ta predlog spremembe olajša sporazum s Svetom.
This amendment is made to facilitate agreement with the Council.