natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
S sklepom varšavskega regionalnega državnega tožilca je bila odgovornost za nadaljevanje postopka predana okrajnemu državnemu tožilcu v okraju Warsaw-Praga Północ.
By decision of the Warsaw regional public prosecutor, responsibility for prosecuting the proceedings was assigned to the Warsaw-Praga Północ District Public Prosecutor.
Po uradni pritožbi, ki jo je vložil eden od teh policistov, je regionalni javni tožilec 30. marca 2001 sklep razveljavil.
After a formal complaint was made by one of the latter, this decision was overruled by the Regional Prosecutor on 30 March 2001.
Tomczak dvanajstkrat zapovrstjo ni zglasil na sodišču, se je sodišče odločilo, da začne s sodnim postopkom v njegovi nenavzočnosti.
As Mr Tomczak has not appeared in Court for twelve consecutive times, the Court decided to proceed with the trial in absentia.
Tomczak nadalje vztraja, da je bil njegov avtomobil jasno označen, da pripada poslancu parlamenta ter da lahko potniki v njegovem avtomobilu pričajo o sumljivem ravnanju domnevnega policista, zaradi česar je odpeljal s kraja dogodka.
Moreover, Mr Tomczak insists that his car was clearly marked as belonging to a Member of Parliament and that the passengers of his car bear witness to the suspicious behaviour of the supposed policeman, for the reason of which he drove off.
2001) pa tudi informacije, ki jih je prejel neposredno od njega, kažejo na politični pritisk v postopku.
Mr Tomczak considers that two different decisions of the same District Public Prosecutor Adam Woźny (decision of 01.02.2001 to discontinue proceedings and indictment of 15.10.2001), as well as the information received from him directly, point to political pressure in the proceedings.
Parlamentu je tudi dostavil časopisne objave o upokojitvi državnega tožilca Karola Napierskega (podpisnika pisma, ki so ga poljske oblasti poslale Odboru za pravne zadeve) v času oblikovanja nove desnosredinske vlade po volitvah septembra 2005.
He also provided the Parliament with news-releases about the retirement of the national prosecutor Karol Napierski (who signed the letter from the Polish authorities to the Committee on Legal Affairs), at the time of establishment of the new centre-right government, created after the elections in September 2005.
Kasneje, dan pred glasovanjem v Odboru za pravne zadeve, je svojo zahtevo umaknil.
He subsequently withdrew that request a day before the vote in Committee on Legal Affairs.
Ustrezne določbe Poslovnika sta člena 6 in 6a, zlasti člen 6(1) in (3):
The relevant provisions of the Rules of Procedure are Rules 6 and 6a, in particular Rule 6(1) and (3):
Vsaka zahteva za zaščito privilegijev in imunitet, ki jo na predsednika naslovi poslanec ali nekdanji poslanec, se razglasi v Parlamentu in posreduje pristojnemu odboru.
Any request addressed to the President by a Member or a former Member to defend privileges and immunities shall be announced in Parliament and referred to the committee responsible.'
Ker je predsednik Parlamenta menil, da je Witold Tomczak začel postopek zaščite svoje imunitete, je bila v skladu z zgoraj omenjenimi členi zahteva razglašena v Parlamentu.
As the President of Parliament considered that Witold Tomczak had opened the procedure for defending his immunity, as laid down in the above-mentioned Rules, the request was announced in Parliament.
Formalne zahteve, da se zadeva pošlje odboru za pravne zadeve, so bile torej izpolnjene.
The formal requirements have therefore been met for the matter to be referred to the Committee on Legal Affairs.
Veljavne določbe
Applicable provisions
Členi 8, 9 in 10 Protokola o privilegijih in imunitetah Evropskih skupnosti (PPI)
Articles 8, 9 and 10 of the Protocol on the privileges and immunities of the European Communities (PPI)
Protokoli, ki so priloženi k pogodbam, tvorijo del osnovne zakonodaje Skupnosti in imajo enak pravni status kot pogodbe same.
The protocols annexed to the original Treaties form part of primary Community law and have the same legal status as the Treaties themselves.
Členi določajo naslednje:
Those articles read as follows:
Prosto gibanje članov Skupščine do kraja zasedanja Skupščine ali nazaj se ne sme upravno ali kako drugače omejevati.
No administrative or other restriction shall be imposed on the free movement of Members of the European Parliament travelling to or from the place of meeting of the European Parliament.
Člani Skupščine uživajo pri carinskem in deviznem nadzoru:
Members of the European Parliament shall, in respect of customs and exchange control, be accorded:
a) enake olajšave, kot jih njihove vlade podeljujejo visokim uradnikom, ko potujejo v tujino zaradi začasne uradne naloge;
a) by their own government, the same facilities as those accorded to senior officials travelling abroad on temporary official missions;
b) enake olajšave, kot jih vlade drugih držav članic podeljujejo predstavnikom tujih vlad na začasni uradni nalogi.
b) by the government of other Member States, the same facilities as those accorded to representatives of foreign governments on temporary official missions.
a) na ozemlju svoje države imunitete, priznane članom parlamenta te države;
a) in the territory of their own State, the immunities accorded to members of their parliament;
b) na ozemlju vseh drugih držav članic imuniteto pred kakršnim koli priporom in sodnim postopkom.
b) in the territory of any other Member State , immunity from any measure of detention and from legal proceedings.
Za člane velja imuniteta tudi medtem, ko potujejo do kraja zasedanja Skupščine in nazaj.
Immunity shall likewise apply to Members while they are travelling to and from the place of meeting of the European Parliament.
Kadar je član zaloten pri storitvi kaznivega dejanja, sklicevanje na imuniteto ni mogoče in Skupščini ne preprečuje uresničevanja pravice do odvzema imunitete svojemu članu.
Immunity cannot be claimed when a Member is found in the act of committing an offence and shall not prevent the European Parliament from exercising its right to waive the immunity of one of its Members.
Da bi lahko ocenili možne kršitve PPI, je koristno, da se spomnimo naslednjih pomembnih dejstev.
In order to assess the possible infringement of the PPI, it is useful to call to mind the following pertinent facts :
Smiselno je preučiti, kako se zgoraj navedena dejstva in navedbe skladajo s privilegiji in imunitetami iz poglavja III, členov 8 - 10(b) PPI:
It is appropriate to consider how the above-mentioned facts and allegations square with the privileges and immunities granted by Chapter III, Articles 8 to10 b) of the PPI:
1) Prvi odstavek člena 8 podeljuje poslancem privilegij prostega gibanja (glede na carinski in devizni nadzor), ko potujejo v kraje ali iz krajev zasedanja Evropskega parlamenta.
1) Article 8, first paragraph grants MEPs the privilege of free movement (in respect of customs and exchange control) when travelling to or from the place of meeting of the European Parliament.
Tomczak se v pismih ne sklicuje na ta privilegij, ki ga jasno ni možno uporabiti.
The letters of Mr Tomczak do not claim this privilege and it is clearly not applicable.
2) Člen 9 podeljuje poslancem nedotakljivost glede mnenj ali glasov, izrečenih pri opravljanju njihovih dolžnosti.
2) Article 9 grants inviolability to Members in respect of opinions expressed or votes cast by them in the performance of their duties.
Ta zaščita sega onkraj trajanja mandata, vendar vedno v obsegu, ki ga omejuje natančna opredelitev v tem členu.
This protection extends beyond the duration of the mandate but always in a scope restricted by the clear-cut language of the Article.
Tomczak junija 1999 ni bil poslanec Evropskega parlamenta, zato se člen 9 v tem primeru ne uporabi.
Mr Tomczak was not a Member of European Parliament in June 1999, and Article 9 is therefore not applicable to this case.
3) Člen 10 določa, da med zasedanjem Evropskega parlamenta njegovi člani : a) na ozemlju svoje države imunitete, priznane članom parlamenta te države.
3) Article 10 declares that [ d ] uring the sessions of the European Parliament its Members shall enjoy: a) in the territory of their own State, the immunities accorded to members of their parliament... .
Obseg poslanske imunitete na Poljskem je zelo podoben tistemu, ki zagotavlja delovanje EP in temelji na PPI.
The scope of the parliamentary immunity in Poland is very similar to the one that serves the functioning of the EP, based on the PPI.
Člen 105 poljske ustave določa naslednje:
Art. 105 of the Polish Constitution reads as follows:
Poslanec ne odgovarja za dejavnosti, ki jih izvaja v okviru svojega mandata v obdobju trajanja mandata in po njegovem izteku.
A Deputy shall not be held liable for activities performed within the scope of a Deputy's mandate during the term thereof nor following expiry thereof.
Glede teh dejavnosti lahko poslanec odgovarja le pred Sejmom, v primeru pa, da je kršil pravice tretjih oseb, se lahko proti njemu uvede sodni postopek le s privolitvijo Sejma.
Regarding such activities, a Deputy can only be held liable before the Sejm and, in a case where he has infringed the rights of third parties, he may only be proceeded against before a court with the consent of the Sejm .
Od dneva razglasitve izida volitev do dneva izteka njegovega mandata poslanec ne more biti kazensko odgovoren brez privolitve Sejma.
From the day of announcement of the results of the elections until the day of the expiry of his mandate, a Deputy shall not be subjected to criminal liability without the consent of the Sejm .
Kazenski postopek, ki je bil začet proti osebi pred datumom njene izvolitve za poslanca, se na zahtevo Sejma začasno prekine do izteka mandata.
Criminal proceedings instituted against a person before the day of his election as Deputy, shall be suspended at the request of the Sejm until the time of expiry of the mandate.
V tem primeru se zastaranje za kazenske postopke podaljša za ustrezen čas.
In such instance, the statute of limitation with respect to criminal proceedings shall be extended for the equivalent time.
Poslanec lahko da soglasje, da bo kazensko odgovarjal.
A Deputy may consent to be brought to criminal liability.
Poslancu se ne sme vzeti prostosti ali ga aretirati brez privolitve Sejma, razen v primeru dokazanega kaznivega dejanja (in flagrante delicto), ko je odvzem prostosti nujen za zagotovitev ustreznega poteka postopka.
A Deputy shall be neither detained nor arrested without the consent of the Sejm , except for cases in flagrante delicto and in which his detention is necessary for securing the proper course of proceedings.
O vsakem takem odvzemu prostosti je treba takoj obvestiti predsednika Sejma, ki lahko odredi takojšnjo izpustitev poslanca.
Any such detention shall be immediately communicated to the Marshal of the Sejm , who may order an immediate release of the Deputy.
Podrobna načela in postopki za uveljavljanje kazenske odgovornosti poslancev so opredeljeni v statutu.
Detailed principles of and procedures for bringing Deputies to criminal liability shall be specified by statute.
Državni tožilec meni, da zahteva po odvzemu imunitete poslanca Tomczaka ni potrebna in da je sklep Sodišča z dne 30. maja 2005 o začasni prekinitvi postopka neutemeljen.
The National Public Prosecutor's Office takes the view that the request for the waiver of Mr Tomczak's immunity is not necessary and that the Court decision of 30 May 2005 to suspend the proceedings is unfounded.
K 36/2001), s katero je sodišče razsodilo, da je zahteva po pridobitvi dovoljenja Sejma ali senata za nadaljevanje kazenskega postopka, začetega proti osebi pred njeno izvolitvijo za poslanca Sejma ali senata, v nasprotju s členom 105(3) poljske ustave.
K 36/2001), in which it found the requirement that authorisation be obtained from the Sejm or Senate to continue criminal proceedings initiated against an individual prior to his election as a Member of the Sejm or the Senate to be in breach of Article 105(3) of the Polish Constitution.
Ob upoštevanju zgornjih navedb se lahko prvo pismo poslanca Tomczaka obravnava kot prošnja Evropskemu parlamentu, naj sprejme sklep, da zaprosi za začasno prekinitev postopka proti njemu, kot to omogoča člen 105(3) poljske ustave.
Taking the above under consideration, Mr Tomczak's first letter can be treated as a request for a decision of the European Parliament to ask for suspension of the proceedings against him, as possible under Art. 105(3) of the Polish Constitution.
Evropski parlament ima torej pravico, da zaščiti formalno imuniteto poslanca Tomczaka ali je ne zaščiti.
The European Parliament has thus the right to defend or not to defend the formal immunity of Mr Tomczak..
Poleg tega pa, ob upoštevanju dejstva, da je poslanska imuniteta ena izmed pravic Parlamenta, je treba o tej pravici dokončno odločiti, pa čeprav je zadevni poslanec kasneje prosil, da Parlament razveljavi postopek.
Moreover, considering that the parliamentary immunity constitutes part of the prerogatives of the Parliament, this right should be expressed in a final decision, even if the Member concerned asked the Parliament to cancel the procedure at a later date.
V skladu z ustaljeno prakso bi se Evropski parlament lahko odločil, da zaščiti imuniteto enega svojih poslancev, če bi obstajal sum, da je namen pregona oškodovanje poslančevega političnega delovanja ( fumus persecutionis ).
Following its established practice, the European Parliament could decide to defend the immunity of one of its Members if a suspicion existed that the prosecution is based on and intention to prejudice the Members's political activities ( fumus persecutionis ) .
V primeru poslanca Tomczaka ni očitnih dokazov za to.
There is no clear evidence of such kind in the case of Mr Tomczak.
Ta pristojnost je bila v primeru poslanca Tomczaka tudi izvršena marca 2001, pol leta pred volitvami, po katerih so vlado sestavile stranke, do katerih je g.
Moreover, this competence was executed in Mr Tomczak's case in March 2001, half a year before the elections, after which the government was formed by parties to which Mr Tomczak remained in opposition.
Na osnovi zgornjih preudarkov in v skladu s členom 6(3) Poslovnika ter po preučitvi razlogov za in proti zaščiti poslančeve imunitete, Odbor za pravne zadeve priporoča, da Evropski parlament ne zaščiti poslanske imunitete Witolda Tomczaka.
On the basis of the above considerations and pursuant to Article 6(3) of the Rules of Procedure, after considering the reasons for and against defending the Member's immunity, the Committee on Legal Affairs recommends that the European Parliament should not defend the parliamentary immunity of Witold Tomczak.
Zahteva za zaščito imunitete in privilegijev Witolda Tomczaka
Request for defence of the immunity and privileges of Witold Tomczak
o predlogu sklepa Sveta in Komisije o sklenitvi začasnega sporazuma o trgovini in trgovinskih zadevah med Evropsko skupnostjo, Evropsko skupnostjo za premog in jeklo ter Evropsko skupnostjo za atomsko energijo na eni strani ter Turkmenistanom na drugi strani
on the proposal for a Council and Commission decision on the conclusion of the Interim Agreement on trade and trade-related matters between the European Community and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and Turkmenistan, of the other part
– ob upoštevanju predloga sklepa Sveta in Komisije (5144/1999)
– having regard to the proposal for a Council and Commission decision (5144/1999)
– ob upoštevanju svoje resolucije z dne 15. marca 2001 o razmerah v Turkmenistanu
– having regard to its resolution of 15 March 2001 on the situation in Turkmenistan
– ob upoštevanju svoje resolucije z dne 23. oktobra 2003 o Turkmenistanu, vključno s Srednjo Azijo
– having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2003 on Turkmenistan, including Central Asia
– ob upoštevanju člena 133 in člena 300(2)(1) Pogodbe ES,
– having regard to Article 133 and Article 300(2), first subparagraph, of the EC Treaty,
– ob upoštevanju člena 300(3)(1) Pogodbe ES, v skladu s katerim se je Svet posvetoval s Parlamentom ( C5‑0338/1999 ),
– having regard to Article 300(3), first subparagraph, of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament ( C5‑0338/1999 ),
– ob upoštevanju člena 51 in člena 83(7) Poslovnika,
– having regard to Rules 51 and 83(7) of its Rules of Procedure,
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za mednarodno trgovino in mnenja Odbora za zunanje zadeve ( A6–0085/2006 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on International Trade and the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs ( A6‑0085/2006 ),
Zgodovinsko ozadje
Historical Background
Odnose med Evropskimi skupnostmi in Turkmenistanom trenutno ureja sporazum o trgovinskem in gospodarskem sodelovanju med Skupnostmi in ZSSR iz leta 1989.
Relations between the European Communities and Turkmenistan are currently covered by the Agreement on Trade and Commercial and Economic cooperation between the Communities and the USSR of 1989.
Pogajanja o sporazumu o partnerstvu in sodelovanju s Turkmenistanom so bila zaključena 24. maja 1997.
Negotiations on a Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) with Turkmenistan were concluded on 24 May 1997.
V sedanjem zakonodajnem obdobju je Odbor za zunanje zadeve začel sporazum ponovno obravnavati (poročevalec je bil Panagiotis Beglitis), Odbor za mednarodno trgovino pa je avtorja tega osnutka poročila imenoval za pripravljavca osnutka mnenja.
In the current legislature, the Committee on Foreign Affairs has resumed work on this agreement (rapporteur: Mr Beglitis) and the Committee on International Trade has appointed the author of this draft Report to act as draftsperson for its opinion.
24. februarja 1998 je bil parafiran začasni sporazum, ki ureja področje trgovine in ukrepe s področja trgovine do začetka veljavnosti sporazuma o partnerstvu in sodelovanju.
On 24 February 1998 an interim agreement, to cover the period until the PCA entered into force and dealing with trade and trade related measures, was initialled.
Odbor za zunanje zadeve je 26. maja 2000 sprejel mnenje o začasnem sporazumu (pripravljavec mnenja je bil Ioannis Souladakis), vendar je Odbor za industrijo, raziskave in energetiko kot pristojni odbor sklenil, da zaradi razmer na področju človekovih pravic ne bo izdelal svojega poročila.
The Committee on Foreign Affairs adopted its opinion on the interim agreement on 26 May 2000 (draftsperson Ioannis Souladakis) but ITRE, the lead Committee, decided not to proceed with its report, again on human rights grounds.
V potrditev tej odločitvi sta bili na plenarnih zasedanjih marca 2001 in oktobra 2003 sprejeti resoluciji.
This decision was confirmed by Plenary resolutions in March 2001 and October 2003.
Razvoj dogodkov od parafiranja sporazumov
Developments since the Agreements were initialled
Pomemben dejavnik pri prekinitvi pogajanj za sporazum je bila decembra 1999 sprejeta odločitev o odpravi vseh omejitev za mandat Saparmurata Nijazova, ki je tako postal dosmrtni predsednik.
A significant factor in the suspension of work on these agreements was the December 1999 decision to remove all limits on Mr Niyazov’s term of office, making him President for life.
Domnevnemu poskusu atentata nanj, novembra leta 2002, je sledil val aretacij in zrežiranih procesov proti vpletenim v napad, katerih mnogi so bili obtoženi sodelovanja z izgnano opozicijo.
Following an apparent assassination attempt on the President in November 2002, there was a wave of arrests and show trials of those implicated in the attack, many of whom were accused of having links with the exiled opposition.
Vse to je spremljal nov drakonski nadzor nad svobodo gibanja in druženja, ki je vključeval stroge zahteve po prijavah vseh javnih shodov ter nove pogoje registracije vseh verskih in civilnih družb.
This was accompanied by draconian new controls on freedom of movement and association, including strict registration requirements for any public gathering, and new registration terms for all religious and civil society groups.
Nedavno je Turkmenistan sprejel zakon proti delu otrok in privolil v obiske poročevalca OVSE za narodne manjšine.
More recently Turkmenistan has passed a law against child labour and accepted visits from the OSCE rapporteur on national minorities.
Toda država mora ratificirati in začeti izvajati še veliko konvencij ILO.
However it has yet to ratify and implement many ILO conventions.
Razmere na področju človekovih pravic in demokracije še niso zadovoljive, čeprav prevladuje vtis, da obstaja pripravljenost za pogajanja o teh vprašanjih.
The situation in respect to human rights and democracy is not satisfactory, although there is the impression that there is a willingness to negotiate these issues.
Gospodarstvo Turkmenistana
Turkmenistan ’s economy
Od vseh držav v regiji je proces prehoda na tržno gospodarstvo v Turkmenistanu najpočasnejši.
Turkmenistan has made the slowest transition progress of all the countries in the region.
Privatiziranih je bilo le nekaj državnih podjetij, vlada pa še naprej strogo nadzoruje proizvodnjo in izvoz plina, nafte in bombaža ter nekatere druge dejavnosti.
Only a few state-owned enterprises have been privatized, and the government remains in firm control of production and exports of gas, oil, and cotton, as well as some other industries.
Nemško podjetje Siemens in francosko podjetje Alcatel sodelujeta pri posodabljanju telefonskih zvez v državi.
Germany’s Siemens and Alcatel of France are involved in upgrading the country’s telephone exchanges.
Vseeno so neposredne tuje naložbe ostale nizke v primerjavi z drugimi državami Srednje Azije, ki so bogate z energetskimi viri.
However foreign direct investment (FDI) has remained low compared to other energy-rich countries in Central Asia.
Glede na statistični pregled svetovne energije ( Statistical Review of World Energy ) podjetja BP je bil Turkmenistan ob koncu leta 2002 glede na dokazane rezerve plina z 1,3-odstotnim deležem na 15. mestu na svetu, med nekdanjimi sovjetskimi republikami ga je prehitela le Rusija.
According to BP’s Statistical Review of World Energy , at end-2002 Turkmenistan ranked 15 th in the world in terms of proven gas reserves, with 1.3% of the global total, and, of the former Soviet republics, second only to Russia.
Dokazane naftne rezerve so ob koncu leta 2002 znašale 500 milijonov sodčkov, kar je 0,1 % svetovnih rezerv.
Proven oil reserves were 500m barrels at end-2002, or 0.1% of the world’s total.
Nafta in plin predstavljata okrog tri četrtine izvoznih dohodkov države.
Oil and gas account for around three-quarters of the country’s export earnings.
Drugi pomemben gospodarski sektor je kmetijstvo, ki predstavlja skoraj 30 % BDP.
Agriculture is the other major economic sector, representing nearly 30% of GDP.
Predelava bombaža se je povečala, tako da se okrog 30 % bombažnih vlaken predela doma (v primerjavi s 3 % v letu 1992).
Cotton-processing has expanded, with about 30% of cotton fibre being processed domestically (compared to 3% in 1992).
Vlada se je osredotočila tudi na razvoj petrokemične industrije.
The government has also focused on developing the petrochemicals industry.
Vsebina začasnega sporazuma
Content of the Interim Agreement
Začasni sporazum vsebuje klavzule sporazuma o partnerstvu in sodelovanju pri trgovini in trgovinskih ukrepih.
The Interim Agreement contains the clauses of the PCA relating to trade and trade-related measures.
Sem spada:
These include:
· obravnava po načelu največjih ugodnosti in ukinitev količinskih omejitev (predmet zaščitnih klavzul);
· most favoured nation treatment and the abolition of quantitative restrictions (subject to safeguard clauses);
· zavezanost Turkmenistana, da na področju zaščite intelektualne lastnine v petih letih doseže raven, primerljivo z ravnijo Skupnosti; in
· Turkmenistan’s commitment to reach standards of protection of intellectual property similar to those in the Community within five years; and
· protokol o vzajemni upravni pomoči v carinskih zadevah.
· a protocol on mutual administrative assistance in customs matters