natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
10. poudarja, da morajo za umik ali spremembo zakonodajnih predlogov veljati enaka splošna načela kot za predložitev predlogov Komisije, kar pomeni, da morajo biti ti ukrepi v skladu z interesom Skupnosti in morajo biti ustrezno utemeljeni;
Stresses that the withdrawal or modification of legislative proposals must be subject to the same general principles that guide the presentation of proposals by the Commission, namely, they must be guided by the Community interest and must be duly justified;
a) Komisija lahko načeloma umakne ali spremeni zakonodajni predlog kadar koli med postopkom za njegovo sprejetje, vse dokler Svet ne odloči.
(a) the Commission may, in principle, withdraw or modify a legislative proposal at any time during the procedures leading to its adoption as long as the Council has not acted.
To pomeni, da po sprejetju skupnega stališča Sveta Komisija tega v postopkih soodločanja in sodelovanja ne more več storiti , razen če je Svet v svojem sklepu o skupnem stališču presegel svoja pooblastila za spreminjanje predlogov Komisije, torej je sklep v resnici zakonodajna pobuda Sveta, česar Pogodba ne predvideva;
This means that in codecision and cooperation procedures the Commission may no longer do so after the adoption of the common position by the Council unless, in its decision on the common position, the Council has exceeded its powers to amend the Commission proposal, so that the decision in reality constitutes a legislative initiative by the Council itself, for which the Treaty does not provide,
b) če Evropski parlament zavrne zakonodajni predlog ali predlaga bistvene spremembe oziroma če kako drugače prosi Komisijo, da umakne ali bistveno spremeni zakonodajni predlog, Komisija to stališče ustrezno upošteva.
(b) where Parliament has rejected a legislative proposal or has suggested substantial amendments to it, or where Parliament has in some other way asked the Commission to withdraw or substantially modify a legislative proposal, the Commission shall take this position into proper consideration.
Če se Komisija zaradi pomembnih razlogov odloči, da ne upošteva stališča Evropskega parlamenta, razloge za tako odločitev predstavi v izjavi Evropskemu parlamentu;
If, for important reasons, the Commission decides not to follow the position expressed by Parliament, it shall explain the reasons for that decision in a statement to Parliament,
c) če Komisija namerava umakniti ali spremeniti zakonodajni predlog na lastno pobudo, o svoji nameri vnaprej obvesti Evropski parlament.
(c) where the Commission intends to withdraw or modify a legislative proposal on its own initiative, it shall give Parliament prior notification of its intention.
Obvestilo, v katerem podaja jasne razloge, zaradi katerih meni, da je treba določen predlog umakniti ali spremeniti, Komisija pravočasno posreduje Evropskemu parlamentu, da lahko izrazi svoje stališče o zadevi.
This notification shall be given in good time, allowing Parliament the opportunity to give its view on the matter, and shall include a clear explanation of the reasons for which the Commission believes that a specific proposal should be withdrawn or modified.
Komisija ustrezno upošteva stališče Evropskega parlamenta.
The Commission shall take the view of Parliament into proper consideration.
13. poudarja, da je obseg, v katerem Komisija upošteva stališča Evropskega parlamenta o umiku ali spremembi zakonodajnih predlogov, bistven element političnega zaupanja, na katerem temelji konstruktivno sodelovanje obeh institucij;
Stresses that the extent to which the Commission takes into consideration the views of Parliament in so far as concerns the withdrawal or the modification of legislative proposals constitutes an essential element of the political trust that forms the basis of sound cooperation between the two institutions;
15. meni, da bi morala Komisija v primeru, če je zakonodajni predlog oblikovan v skladu s členom 138, ustrezno obvestiti evropske socialne partnerje, da namerava umakniti ali bistveno spremeniti zakonodajni predlog;
Considers that, where a legislative proposal has been formulated in accordance with Article 138, the Commission should duly inform the European social partners about its intention to withdraw or substantially modify the legislative proposal;
Komisija je preverila vse predloge, ki jih je predložila in so zdaj v zakonodajnem postopku.
The Commission has screened all of its proposals currently being dealt with by a legislative procedure.
To sporočilo je vzpodbudilo Odbor za ustavne zadeve, da je začel obravnavati institucionalne vidike tega vprašanja.
The communication has prompted the Committee on Constitutional Affairs to look into the institutional aspects of this matter.
Ena od glavnih značilnosti zakonodaje Evropske skupnosti, kot je določeno s Pogodbo ES, je skoraj vsesplošna in izključna pravica Komisije, da predlaga zakonodajo, kar predstavlja neke vrste monopol.
One of the hallmarks of Community law-making, in the form established by the EC Treaty, is the virtually all-embracing exclusive right of initiative accorded to the Commission, tantamount almost to a monopoly.
Razen redkih izjem se vsi zakonodajni akti v Evropski skupnosti sprejmejo na predlog Komisije.
Barring rare exceptions, all legislative acts in the EC are adopted ‘on a proposal from the Commission’.
Vendar pa Komisija ni zakonodajalec.
But the Commission is not the Legislator.
Zakone, ki jih predlaga Komisija, sprejme Svet ali Evropski parlament in Svet skupaj.
Instead, the laws proposed by the Commission are adopted either by the Council alone or by Parliament and the Council acting jointly.
Tako Pogodba ES opisuje institucionalno ravnovesje med tremi organi na področju zakonodaje.
The EC Treaty thus brings the three institutions into an institutional balance where legislation is concerned.
Da se to ravnovesje ohrani, je predvsem potrebno, da posamezen organ ne prekorači svojih pooblastil in spoštuje pooblastila drugih.
To preserve that balance, each institution must, first of all, allow for the powers of the others and refrain from overstepping its own powers.
Načelo institucionalnega ravnovesja med drugim zahteva tudi aktivno in lojalno sodelovanje med organi, ki presega zapisana postopkovna pravila.
The principle of institutional balance, however, also requires the institutions to work in active and honest cooperation extending beyond the written procedural rules.
Vse to je nujno potrebno za uspešno delovanje demokratične Unije, na podlagi načel pravne države.
That is a sine qua non if the Union is to operate democratically under the rule of law.
Načelo institucionalnega ravnovesja ima za posledico konkretne pravne obveznosti, ki se jih morajo organi držati pri izvajanju pooblastil, ki so določena v Pogodbi.
The institutional balance principle accordingly entails specific legal obligations that the institutions have to observe when exercising the powers conferred on them by the Treaty.
Tudi na področju zakonodaje vsebina in obseg pooblastil organov ne izhajata zgolj iz zapisanega besedila pogodb.
Consequently, in law-making as in other areas, the substance and extent of the institutions’ powers do not derive solely from the written text of the Treaties.
Podlaga za pristojnost Komisije, da vnese spremembe ali umakne predlog
Basis of the Commission’s power to modify and withdraw its proposals
V skladu z drugim odstavkom člena 250 Pogodbe ES lahko Komisija predlog spremeni tudi med zakonodajnim postopkom.
Under Article 250(2) TEC the Commission may alter a proposal even after the legislative procedure has got under way.
Delni umik zakonodajnega predloga je tako sprememba, ki je izrecno predvidena v drugem odstavku člena 250 Pogodbe ES.
On the other hand, the Commission’s power to withdraw an entire legislative proposal is not mentioned in the EC Treaty in so many words.
Pristojnost Komisije, da umakne celoten zakonodajni predlog, v Pogodbi ES ni izrecno navedena, vendar pa je logično dopolnilo drugega odstavka člena 250 Pogodbe ES, ki zagotavlja pristojnost za vnašanje sprememb, kajti le obe skupaj, pristojnost za vnašanje sprememb in pristojnost za umik predlogov, predstavljata drugo plat pravice Komisije do pobude.
It does, however, constitute the logical extension to the power to modify proposals under Article 250(2) TEC because both powers together, the power to alter proposals and the power to withdraw them, are needed in order to provide the counterpart to the Commission’s right of initiative.
Časovna omejitev pristojnosti Komisije, da vnese spremembe ali umakne predlog
Time limit applying to the Commission’s power to modify and withdraw its proposals
V skladu z drugim odstavkom člena 250 Pogodbe ES lahko Komisija spremeni predlog, ki ga je predložila, če Svet še ni odločil.
Article 250(2) TEC stipulates that after the Commission has submitted a legislative proposal, it may alter it at any time as long as the Council has not acted.
Ta uredba ne utemeljuje le pristojnosti za vnašanje sprememb, ampak obenem opredeljuje tudi časovno omejitev zanje.
This arrangement therefore not only establishes the basis for the Commission’s power to modify its proposals, but also limits it in time.
Ta časovni okvir velja tudi za razširjeno pristojnost Komisije, da umakne predlog, ki prav tako izhaja iz drugega odstavka člena 250 Pogodbe ES.
The limit applies equally to the complementary power to withdraw proposals also deriving from Article 250(2) TEC.
Ta določba velja za vse zakonodajne postopke, predvidene v Pogodbi.
In addition, this provision applies to all of the legislative procedures set out in the Treaty.
Vendar pa obstajajo različni pogledi o tem, katera faza postopka je opisana v drugem odstavku člena 250 Pogodbe ES, zlasti glede postopka sodelovanja in postopka soodločanja.
Interpretations diverge, however, especially where the cooperation and codecision procedures are concerned, as to the stage described in Article 250(2) TEC.
Sodišče doslej ni imelo priložnosti, da bi razsodilo o tem vprašanju.
The Court of Justice has had no occasion to date to rule on this point.
Pravna služba Evropskega parlamenta je v svojem mnenju, ki ga je pripravila na prošnjo Odbora za ustavne zadeve, oblikovala naslednji zaključek:
In its opinion delivered at the request of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, Parliament’s Legal Service reached the following conclusion:
Ta razlaga prav tako ni v nasprotju z drugim odstavkom člena 251 Pogodbe ES, ki določa le, da Komisija obvesti Parlament pred drugo obravnavo o svojem mnenju glede skupnega stališča Sveta in da poda svoje mnenje o morebitnih predlogih sprememb Parlamenta.
This interpretation does not, moreover, clash with Article 251(2) TEC, which requires the Commission merely to inform Parliament before second reading of its attitude to the Council common position and to such amendments as Parliament might table at second reading.
Te določbe pomenijo, da po Pogodbi ES Komisija v tem trenutku ni več "lastnica" predmeta zakonodajnega postopka, in potrjujejo, da Komisija nikakor ne more več umakniti ali dopolniti zakonodajnega predloga.
These provisions thus clearly demonstrate that, for the purposes of the EC Treaty, the Commission is at this stage of the procedure no longer considered the ‘owner’ of the area to be legislated for; accordingly, they confirm the view that once the procedure has progressed to this stage, the Commission has no power whatsoever to withdraw or alter the proposed legislation.
Očitno je, da se to v isti meri nanaša tudi na postopek soodločanja.
Obviously, the foregoing applies equally to the cooperation procedure.
Sklep Sveta iz drugega odstavka člena 250 Pogodbe ES, ki določa časovno omejitev pristojnosti za umik ali spremembo, je v postopku soodločanja v skladu s točko a člena 252 Pogodbe ES skupno stališče.
In that procedure, therefore, when the Council acts as provided for in Article 250(2) TEC, in so doing establishing the cut-off point for the power to modify or withdraw the initial proposal, it adopts a common position as referred to in Article 252(a) TEC.
Seveda lahko sklep Sveta o skupnem stališču pristojnost Komisije, da vnese spremembe ali umakne predlog, dejansko omeji le, kadar ga Svet sprejme zakonito.
A Council common position naturally cannot serve to limit the Commission’s power to modify or withdraw its initial proposal unless it has itself been adopted in accordance with the rules.
Protipravni sklep Sveta v nasprotnem primeru ne bi imel učinka.
An unlawful common position would produce no effect.
To bi se zgodilo zlasti v primeru, če bi Svet s sklepom o skupnem stališču prekoračil pooblastila glede spremembe predloga Komisije, na primer, če bi povsem spremenil predlagani predmet zakonodajnega postopka.
This would be the case especially if the Council, in acting to adopt a common position, were to overstep its power to amend the Commission proposal, for instance by replacing the proposed area to be regulated with something completely new.
Takšen sklep bi dejansko predstavljal zakonodajno pobudo Sveta, kar zaradi pomanjkanja tovrstne podlage v pogodbah ne bi bilo veljavno.
An act of that kind would in reality constitute an independent legislative initiative by the Council, which would have no effect, because it would have no basis in the Treaty.
Prav tako sklep ne bi mogel omejiti pristojnosti Komisije, da predlaga spremembe in umika predloge, tudi če je že bil sprejet kot "skupno stališče".
It follows that it could not serve either to limit the Commission’s power to modify or withdraw its proposal, even if it had been formally adopted as a ‘common position’.
Izvajanje pristojnosti Komisije, da vnese spremembe ali umakne predlog
Exercise of the Commission’s power to modify and withdraw its proposals.
Pogodba ES ne vsebuje nobenih določb glede izvajanja pristojnosti Komisije, da vnese spremembe ali umakne predlog.
There is nothing in the EC Treaty that expressly dictates how the Commission should exercise its power to modify and withdraw its proposals.
Kljub temu pa tukaj ne gre za pravno praznino.
This does not mean, however, that there is a legal vacuum.
Tako iz načela institucionalnega ravnovesja in lojalnega sodelovanja med institucijami izhaja splošna dolžnost Komisije, da spoštuje vlogo, ki jo ima Evropski parlament v zakonodajnem postopku, in je ne poskuša obiti s spreminjanjem in umikanjem predlogov.
In particular, the principles of institutional balance and honest cooperation among the institutions impose a general obligation on the Commission to take account of Parliament’s role in the legislative process and refrain from using its powers in such a way as to circumvent it.
V zvezi z obstojem te splošne dolžnosti ni nesoglasij med Komisijo in Evropskim parlamentom; v točkah 31–33 okvirnega sporazuma o odnosih med Evropskim parlamentom in Komisijo z dne 26. maja 2005 (okvirni dogovor) je deloma že bila sporazumno opredeljena.
There is no dispute between the Commission and Parliament about the fact that such an obligation exists; to some extent, points 31 to 33 of the framework agreement of 26 May 2005 on relations between Parliament and the Commission (Framework Agreement) have already translated it into a mutual understanding.
Seveda bi bilo zelo zaželeno, da bi udeleženi organi, izhajajoč iz delne opredelitve te splošne dolžnosti, lahko oblikovali skupno opredelitev, da se splošno dolžnost v največji možni meri izvaja v praksi.
It would obviously be highly desirable if the institutions concerned, instead of just giving partial effect to this general obligation, could reach a common understanding to translate it comprehensively into practice.
V vsakem primeru pa bi moral Evropski parlament svoje mnenje o tem izraziti v obliki smernic.
Parliament should, in any event, put forward guidelines setting out its point of view.
Zato je treba razlikovati med dvema različnima skupinama primerov:
To that end, a distinction needs to be made between two types of situations:
- Komisija spremeni ali umakne zakonodajni predlog, ki je bil podan na pobudo Evropskega parlamenta
- cases where the Commission modifies or withdraws proposed legislation at the instigation of Parliament, and
- Komisija spremeni ali umakne zakonodajni predlog, ki je bil podan na njeno lastno pobudo.
- cases where the Commission modifies or withdraws proposed legislation on its own initiative.
a) Sprememba in umik na pobudo Evropskega parlamenta
(a) Modification and withdrawal at the instigation of Parliament
V točkah 31 in 33 okvirnega sporazuma sta se Komisija in Evropski parlament dogovorila, kot sledi:
In points 31 and 33 of the Framework Agreement the Commission and Parliament have laid down the following arrangement:
"Komisija se zavezuje, da bo natančno preučila spremembe k svojim zakonodajnim predlogom, ki jih je sprejel Parlament, z namenom njihovega upoštevanja v morebitnem spremenjenem predlogu."
‘The Commission undertakes to carefully examine amendments to its legislative proposals adopted by Parliament, with a view to taking them into account in any amended proposal.’
"Za zakonodajne postopke, ki ne vključujejo soodločanja, Komisija: ... se zavezuje, da bo po potrebi umaknila zakonodajni predlog, ki ga je Parlament zavrnil.
‘For legislative procedures not entailing codecision, the Commission ... undertakes, if appropriate, to withdraw a legislative proposal that Parliament has rejected.
Če se Komisija zaradi pomembnih razlogov in po presoji kolegija odloči ohraniti svoj predlog, razloge za tako odločitev predstavi v izjavi pred Parlamentom."
If, for important reasons and after consideration by the College, the Commission decides to maintain its proposal, it shall explain the reasons for that decision in a statement before Parliament.’
Ti določbi sta glede na svoje posamezno področje uporabe v skladu z institucionalnim ravnovesjem, kot je zapisano v Pogodbi ES.
Within their respective areas of application these two provisions are entirely in keeping with the institutional balance established by the EC Treaty.
Vseeno pa ne zajemata vseh primerov, ko je potrebna zakonska ureditev.
They do not, however, cover every case that needs to be regulated.
Tako je prvič trenutna ureditev, po kateri mora Komisija praviloma umakniti svoj predlog, če ga je zavrnil Parlament, izrecno omejena na tiste zakonodajne postopke, ki ne vključujejo soodločanja.
In the first place, as regards the current rule that the Commission is obliged as a matter of principle to withdraw a proposal rejected by Parliament, its scope is explicitly restricted to those legislative procedures not entailing codecision.
Po drugi strani pa je v sporazumu določeno, da je Komisija dolžna Parlamentu podati utemeljitev samo v primeru, da želi predlog ohraniti kljub zavrnitvi Parlamenta.
Secondly, the agreement requires the Commission to explain its position to Parliament only when, despite Parliament’s rejection, it wishes to keep its proposal on the table.
Za primer, da ne namerava upoštevati bistvenih predlogov sprememb Parlamenta, pa tovrstna ureditev ne obstaja.
No such arrangement applies when the Commission intends to disregard substantial amendments by Parliament.
Tako ni nikakršnega razloga, da bi zadeve, primerljive s tistimi, ki so določene v okvirnem sporazumu, obravnavali drugače kot tiste, kot so v okvirnem sporazumu izrecno opredeljene.
There is, however, no apparent reason why cases not covered by the Framework Agreement, but of a comparable type, should be treated differently from cases expressly regulated by the agreement.
b) Sprememba in umik na pobudo Komisije
(b) Modification and withdrawal on the initiative of the Commission
V točki 32 okvirnega sporazuma o odnosih med Evropskim parlamentom in Komisijo sta se oba organa sporazumela, kot sledi:
In point 32 of the Framework Agreement on relations between Parliament and the Commission the two institutions have laid down the following arrangement:
"Komisija Parlament in Svet predhodno obvesti o umiku svojih predlogov."
‘The Commission shall give Parliament and the Council prior notification before withdrawing its proposals.’
Dogovor, da Komisija vnaprej obvesti Parlament, je nedvomno bistven in nujen pogoj, da lahko govorimo o postopku umika, ki poteka v duhu lojalnega sodelovanja.
The Commission’s undertaking to give Parliament prior notification is undoubtedly a necessary precondition: any failure to satisfy it would rule out the possibility of a withdrawal procedure according to the spirit of honest cooperation.
Vendar pa to nikakor ni dovolj.
But it is definitely not sufficient.
V skladu s tem je Komisija v svojem sporočilu z dne 27. septembra 2005 že naredila korak naprej, saj ni sporočila zgolj tega, katere predloge je že umaknila, ampak tudi, katere namerava umakniti.
Earlier on the Commission accordingly took another step in the same direction with its communication of 27 September 2005, in which, rather than wiating to report on decisions already reached, it spelled out its intentions regarding the withdrawal of proposals.
Vendar pa to samo po sebi še ne zadošča za izpolnitev vseh zahtev lojalnega sodelovanja.
Yet even this is not enough on its own to completely fulfil the requirements of honest cooperation.
O lojalnem sodelovanju Komisije in Parlamenta v zvezi s tem lahko govorimo le, ko Komisija Parlament obvesti pravočasno in temeljito, tako da lahko Parlament zavzame stališče o nameravanem umiku predloga.
The only situation that could rightly be termed honest cooperation between the Commission and Parliament would be one in which the Commission informed Parliament in sufficient time and detail to enable it to deliver an opinion on the intended withdrawal of a proposal.
Seveda vsebina stališča Parlamenta glede na trenutno besedilo pogodbe za Komisijo ni zavezujoča.
The substance of Parliament’s opinion could naturally not be regarded as binding on the Commission under the Treaty as it presently stands.
Stališče bi tako postalo gola formalnost, če ga Komisija ne bi bila obvezana skrbno preučiti in temeljito razmisliti o predlogih Parlamenta.
On the other hand, the opinion would be reduced to a mere formality if the Commission did not offer a quid pro quo by at the very least promising to consider Parliament’s views carefully and take them duly into account in its final decision.
Seveda mora Komisija tudi sporočiti Parlamentu, zakaj v posameznih primerih ni upoštevala stališča Parlamenta.
Needless to say, the Commission would also have to tell Parliament why it had disregarded its opinion if that case arose.
Zaradi vseh zgoraj navedenih razlogov uporaba teh načel ne more biti omejena zgolj na pristojnost Komisije, da umakne zakonodajni predlog (v celoti).
For the reasons described above the applicability of these principles should not be confined to cases in which the Commission withdraws a legislative proposal (as a whole).
Tudi kadar Komisija predlaga bistvene spremembe (npr. delni umik obširnega dela besedila) zakonodajnega predloga, je načelo lojalnega sodelovanja v zadostni meri zagotovljeno samo na ta način.
When the Commission substantially alters a proposal (for instance by withdrawing large parts of the text), an approach along these lines is again the only way in which the imperatives of the honest cooperation principle can be properly satisfied.
Vloge pri zakonodajnem postopku so posameznim organom dodeljene v skladu s Pogodbo ES.
The roles to be played by the individual institutions in the legislative process are assigned to them by the EC Treaty.
Seveda ta razdelitev pristojnosti ne more obenem natančno določiti vseh možnih vidikov njihovega izvajanja.
By definition, apportionment of powers by this means cannot likewise deal expressly with all points related to their exercise.
Pogodba ES to nalogo prepušča organom, ki morajo sami sporazumno določiti način in obliko svojega sodelovanja.
That task is conferred under the Treaty on the institutions themselves, which have to agree on how they are to work together.
Tako je zapisano v prvem odstavku člena 218 Pogodbe ES ter predvideno tudi v členu III-397 evropske ustave.
That is what is already laid down at present in Article 218(1) of the EC Treaty and also provided for in Article III-397 of the European Constitution.