natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
b) ne pridobivajo nikakršnih podatkov od domnevnih izvajalcev pregona na način, ki bi povzročil, da bi bili ti izvajalci obveščeni, da je zadevni prosilec vložil prošnjo za azil, s čimer bi se ogrozilo fizično integriteto prosilca in njegovih vzdrževancev ali svobodo in varnost njegovih družinskih članov, ki še vedno živijo v izvorni državi .
(b) obtain any information from the alleged actor(s) of persecution in a manner that would result in such actor(s) being directly informed of the fact that an application has been made by the applicant in question, and would jeopardise the physical integrity of the applicant and his/her dependants, or the liberty and security of his/her family members still living in the country of origin .
b) ne pridobivajo nikakršnih podatkov od domnevnih izvajalcev pregona.
(b) obtain any information from the alleged actor(s) of persecution.
Države članice zagotovijo, da se takšen postopek zaključi v najkrajšem možnem času, ne da bi to vplivalo na ustreznost in celovitost obravnave.
Member States shall ensure that such a procedure is concluded as soon as possible, without prejudice to an adequate and complete examination.
Države članice zagotovijo, da se takšen postopek zaključi v najkrajšem možnem času in najpozneje v šestih mesecih , ne da bi to vplivalo na ustreznost in celovitost obravnave.
Member States shall ensure that such a procedure is concluded as soon as possible and within no later than 6 months , without prejudice to an adequate and complete examination.
Člen 23, odstavek 2, točka (b)
Article 23, paragraph 2, point (b)
b) je na njegovo zahtevo obveščen o roku, v katerem lahko pričakuje odločitev o svoji prošnji.
b) receive, upon his/her request, information on the time-frame within which the decision on his/her application is to be expected.
Takšno obvestilo ne obvezuje države članice, da sprejme odločitev v zvezi z zadevnim prosilcem v tem roku .
Such information shall not constitute an obligation for the Member State towards the applicant concerned to take a decision within that time frame .
b) je na njegovo zahtevo obveščen o roku, v katerem lahko pričakuje odločitev o svoji prošnji , ki ne presega treh mesecev .
b) receive, upon his/her request, information on the time-frame within which the decision on his/her application is to be expected , which shall not exceed 3 months .
Člen 23, odstavek 3 a (novo)
Article 23, paragraph 3 a (new)
Države članice uporabljajo navaden postopek v primeru posebno občutljivih oseb, vključno z razvezanimi otroki in osebami, ki so morda doživele travmo ali spolno nasilje.
Member States shall apply the regular procedure to particularly vulnerable persons, including separated children and persons who may have experienced trauma or sexual violence.
Prošnje posebno občutljivih oseb je načeloma treba obravnavati v običajnem postopku.
Applications by particularly vulnerable persons should be treated in a regular procedure as matter of principle.
Člen 23, odstavek 4, točka a
Article 23, paragraph 4, point (a)
(a) prosilec pri oddaji svoje prošnje in predstavljanju dejstev sproži samo tista vprašanja, ki niso pomembna ali pa le minimalno pomembna za obravnavo vprašanja, ali je prosilec upravičen do statusa begunca na podlagi Direktive Sveta 2004/83/ES; ali
(a) the applicant in submitting his/her application and presenting the fact, has only raised issues that are not relevant or of minimal relevance to the examination of whether he/she qualifies as a refugee by virtue of Council Directive 2004/83/EC; or
(a) prosilec pri oddaji svoje prošnje in predstavljanju dejstev sproži samo tista vprašanja, ki niso pomembna za obravnavo vprašanja, ali je prosilec upravičen do statusa begunca na podlagi Direktive Sveta 2004/83/ES; ali
(a) the applicant in submitting his/her application and presenting the fact, has only raised issues that are not relevant to the examination of whether he/she qualifies as a refugee by virtue of Council Directive 2004/83/EC; or
Pojem minimalno pomembno je preveč nedoločen.
The concept of minimal relevance is too vague.
Člen 23, odstavek 4, točka c
Article 23, paragraph 4, point (c)
(c) se šteje, da je prošnja za azil neutemeljena:
(c) the application for asylum is considered to be unfounded:
(c) se šteje, da je prošnja za azil neutemeljena ,
(c) the application for asylum is considered to be unfounded
– ker prosilec prihaja iz varne izvorne države v smislu členov 30 , 30A in 30B te direktive, ali
- because the applicant is from a safe country of origin within the meaning of Articles 30, 30A and 30B of this Directive, or
ker prosilec prihaja iz varne izvorne države v smislu členov 30 in 30B te direktive, ali
because the applicant is from a safe country of origin within the meaning of Articles 30 and 30B of this Directive, or
– ker se šteje, da država, ki ni država članica, velja za varno za prosilca ne glede na člen 29(1); ali
- because the country which is not a Member State is considered to be a safe third country for the applicant, without prejudice to Article 29(1); or
Možnost prednostne razvrstitve ali pospeševanja postopka je treba dovoliti le v primerih, kjer gre nedvomno za goljufijo, ali ki so očitno neutemeljeni.
The possibility of prioritising or accelerating of the procedure should be permitted only in cases that are clearly fraudulent or manifestly unfounded.
Prosilci, ki ne izpolnjuje pogojev za status begunca, so lahko kljub temu upravičeni do dopolnilne/pomožne zaščite.
Applicants who do not qualify for refugee status may nevertheless qualify for complementary/subsidiary protection.
Člen 23, odstavek 4, točka (d)
Article 23, paragraph 4, point (d)
(d) je prosilec zavajal organe tako, da je dajal napačne podatke ali dokumente ali zadrževal pomembne podatke ali dokumente o svoji identiteti in/ali državljanstvu , ki bi lahko negativno vplivali na odločitev ; ali
(d) the applicant has misled the authorities by presenting false information or documents or by withholding relevant information or documents with respect to his/her identity and/or nationality that could have had a negative impact on the decision ; or
(d) je prosilec, z namenom goljufije, zavajal organe tako, da je dajal napačne dokumente o svoji identiteti in/ali državljanstvu; ali
(d) the applicant , with a fraudulent intent, has misled the authorities by presenting false documents with respect to his/her identity and/or nationality; or
Izraz „napačni podatki“ je preveč subjektiven.
Terminology "false information" is too subjective.
Člen 23, odstavek 4, točka e
Article 23, paragraph 4, point (e)
(e) je prosilec vložil drugo prošnjo za azil, v kateri je navedel druge osebne podatke; ali
(e) the applicant has filed another application for asylum stating other personal data; or
(e) je prosilec z namenom goljufije vložil drugo prošnjo za azil, v kateri je navedel druge osebne podatke; ali
(e) the applicant , with a fraudulent intent, has filed another application for asylum stating other personal data; or
Glej obrazložitev člena 23(4)(d).
See justification of Article 23, paragraph 4, point d.
Člen 23, odstavek 4, točka f
Article 23, paragraph 4, point (f)
(f) prosilec ni priskrbel podatkov, s katerimi bi z razumno stopnjo gotovosti opredelil svojo identiteto ali državljanstvo, ali, če se zdi, da je zlonamerno uničil ali odstranil osebni dokument ali potno listino, ki bi pomagala pri ugotavljanju njegove identitete ali državljanstva; ali
(f) the applicant has not produced information to establish with a reasonable degree of certainty his/her identity or nationality, or, it is likely that, in bad faith, he/she has destroyed or disposed of an identity or travel document that would have helped establish his/her identity or nationality; or
(f) prosilec z namenom goljufije ni priskrbel podatkov, s katerimi bi z razumno stopnjo gotovosti opredelil svojo identiteto ali državljanstvo, ali, če se zdi, da je zlonamerno uničil ali odstranil osebni dokument ali potno listino, ki bi pomagala pri ugotavljanju njegove identitete ali državljanstva; ali
(f) the applicant , with a fraudulent intent, has not produced information to establish with a reasonable degree of certainty his/her identity or nationality, or, it is likely that, in bad faith, he/she has destroyed or disposed of an identity or travel document that would have helped establish his/her identity or nationality; or
Člen 23, odstavek 4, točka g
Article 23, paragraph 4, point (g)
(g) je prosilec svoj položaj predstavil neskladno, protislovno, malo verjetno ali nezadostno predstavitev, zaradi katere je njegova prošnja jasno neprepričljiva v zvezi s tem, da je prosilec žrtev pregona na podlagi Direktive Sveta 2004/83/ES; ali
(g) the applicant has made inconsistent, contradictory, unlikely or insufficient representations which make his/her claim clearly unconvincing in relation to his/her having being the object of persecution under Council Directive 2004/83/EC; or
Člen 23 v mnogih primerih dovoljuje prednostno razvrstitev ali pospeševanje, posledice tega pa v veliki meri nosijo države članice, kar lahko vodi do znatno zmanjšanih zaščitnih ukrepov.
Article 23 permits prioritisation or acceleration in a wide range of cases, the consequences of which are left largely to the Member States, and may lead to considerably reduced safeguards.
Direktiva državam med drugim dovoljuje, da odpravijo osebne razgovore in druge pomembne postopkovne zahteve.
Amongst others, the Directive permits States to dispense with personal interviews and other significant procedural requirements.
Mnogo takšnih zahtevkov ne spada v opredelitev „očitno neprimernih“ ali „očitno neutemeljenih“ zahtevkov, katere se lahko obravnava po pospešenem postopku glede na odločitve držav in mednarodnih organov.
Many such claims will not fall within the definition of “clearly abusive” or “manifestly unfounded” claims, which could be dealt with through an accelerated procedure, according to the conclusions of states and international bodies.
Člen 23, odstavek 4, točka (o)
Article 23, paragraph 4, point (o)
o) je prošnjo vložila neporočena mladoletna oseba, za katero velja člen 5(4)(c), potem ko je bila prošnja staršev ali starša, ki zanjo odgovarja(ta), zavrnjena na podlagi odločitve in ni bilo posredovanih nikakršnih novih elementov v zvezi z njenimi posebnimi okoliščinami ali položajem v njeni izvorni državi.
(o) the application was made by an unmarried minor to whom Article 5(4)(c) applies after the application of the parents or parent responsible for the minor has been rejected by a decision and no relevant new elements were raised with respect to his/her particular circumstances or to the situation in his/her country of origin.
o) je prošnjo vložil otrok , za katerega velja člen 5(4)(c), potem ko je bila prošnja staršev ali starša, ki zanjo odgovarja(ta), zavrnjena na podlagi odločitve in ni bilo posredovanih nikakršnih novih elementov v zvezi z njenimi posebnimi okoliščinami ali položajem v njeni izvorni državi.
(o) the application was made by a child to whom Article 5(4)(c) applies after the application of the parents or parent responsible for the minor has been rejected by a decision and no relevant new elements were raised with respect to his/her particular circumstances or to the situation in his/her country of origin.
Dejstvo, da je prosilec poročen otrok, kar se v skladu s tradicijo v nekaterih državah lahko zgodi zelo zgodaj, ni razlog, da se tako osebo obravnava drugače kot ostale mladoletne osebe.
The fact of an applicant who is a child being married, which may happen very early under some countries' traditions, is no reason to justify such a person being treated differently from other children.
Člen 23, odstavek 4 a (novo)
Article 23, paragraph 4 a (new)
Države članice upoštevajo potrebe po dopolnilni/pomožni zaščiti, ko se postopek razvrsti prednostno ali pospeši glede na odstavek 4 (a) do (o).
Member States shall take into consideration complementary/subsidiary protection needs when the procedure has been prioritised or accelerated according to paragraph 4 (a) to (o).
Posebni postopki:
Specific procedures
Države članice lahko poleg tega predvidijo naslednje posebne postopke, ki odstopajo od osnovnih načel in jamstev iz Poglavja II:
Member States may moreover provide for the following specific procedures derogating from the basic principles and guarantees of Chapter II:
(a) predhodno presojo za obravnavanje primerov, ki se rešujejo v okviru določb iz Oddelka IV;
(a) a preliminary examination for the purpose of processing cases considered within the framework of the provisions set out in Section IV;
(b) postopke za obravnavanje primerov, ki se rešujejo v okviru določb iz Oddelka V.
(b) procedures for the purpose of processing cases considered within the framework set out in Section V.
Države članice lahko predvidijo tudi odstopanje, upoštevajoč Oddelek VI.
Member States may also provide a derogation in respect of Section VI.
Možnosti odstopanja od minimalnih standardov lahko vodijo h kršitvam mednarodnega prava.
The possibilities to derogate from minimum standards may lead to breaches of international law.
Nobenega razloga ni, da so zahteve primernega zakonitega postopka za primere, ko so prošnje za azil predložene na meji, manjše od zahtev za primere, ko so prošnje predložene znotraj ozemlja ali v primeru naknadnih zahtevkov.
There is no reason for requirements associated with due process of law in asylum claims submitted at the border to be less than those submitted within the territory or in cases of subsequent claims.
Ta člen nejasno opredeli načela in zagotovila, kjer so ali niso mogoče izjeme.
This article fails to define clearly the principles and guarantees to which exceptions may or may not be made.
Takšen pristop ne spodbuja cilja usklajevanja proceduralnih standardov in povečuje tveganje vračanja tujcev.
Such an approach is not conducive to the objective of harmonisation of procedural standards, and increases the risk of refoulement.
Vse prošnje za mednarodno zaščito bodo najprej ocenjene na podlagi opredelitve izraza begunec iz Ženevske konvencije in, če ta merila ne bodo izpolnjena, na podlagi zahtev za pomožno zaščito.
All applications for international protection will first be assessed on the basis of the refugee definition contained in the Geneva Convention and, only if these criteria are not fulfilled, on the basis of the requirements for subsidiary protection.
Bistveno je, da se vse prošnje najprej preuči na podlagi meril Ženevske konvencije in, če ta merila niso izpolnjena, na podlagi meril za dopolnilno/pomožno zaščito v skladu z ostalimi pravnimi obveznostmi.
It is fundamental that any application first is considered under criteria of the Geneva Convention and, if these are not met, under the criteria for complementary/subsidiary protection in accordance with other legal obligations.
Člen 25, odstavek 2, uvodni del
Article 25, paragraph 2, introductory part
Države članice lahko štejejo, da je prošnja za azil nesprejemljiva v skladu s tem členom, če:
Member States may consider an application for asylum as inadmissible pursuant to this Article if:
Države članice lahko brez poseganja v odstavek 1a štejejo, da je prošnja za azil nesprejemljiva v skladu s tem členom, če:
Without prejudice to paragraph 1a, Member States may consider an application for asylum as inadmissible pursuant to this Article if:
Člen 25, odstavek 2, točka c
Article 25, paragraph 2, point (c)
(c) država, ki ni država članica, velja za prosilcu varno tretjo državo na podlagi člena 27;
(c) a country which is not a Member State is considered as a safe third country for the applicant, pursuant to Article 27;
Primeri nedopustnih prošenj so lahko ovrednoteni le glede na Ženevsko konvencijo.
The cases of inadmissible applications can be evaluated only according to the Geneva Convention.
Vse točke od (c) do (g) so zajete v novem odstavku 1 a.
All points from (c) to (g) are covered by new paragraph 1 a.
Člen 25, odstavek 2, točka f
Article 25, paragraph 2, point (f)
(f) je prosilec po končni odločitvi vložil enako prošnjo;
(f) the applicant has lodged an identical application after a final decision;
Glej obrazložitev člena 25(2)(c).
See justification of Article 25, paragraph 2, point c.
Člen 25, odstavek 2, točka (f a) (novo)
Article 25, paragraph 2, point (f a) (new)
f a) prosilec, ki bo odstranjen z ozemlja, kjer nezakonito prebiva, vloži prošnjo za pridobitev pravice do azila .
(fa) The applicant, when about to be expelled from the territory in which he or she is residing illegally, appeals to be given the possibility of enjoying right of asylum.
Da bi nelegalnim priseljencem, ki so bili tako opredeljeni, preprečili izjave, da so preganjani zaradi političnih ali drugih razlogov, in s tem zlorabo pravice do azila.
To prevent illegal immigrants who have been identified as such from declaring that they are being persecuted for political or other reasons and thus abusing the right of asylum.
Člen 27, odstavek 1, uvodni del
Article 27, paragraph 1, introductory part
Države članice lahko uporabljajo pojem varne tretje države samo, kadar so pristojni organi prepričani, da se bo z osebo, ki išče azil, v zadevni tretji državi ravnalo v skladu z naslednjimi načeli:
Member States may apply the safe third country concept only where the competent authorities are satisfied that a person seeking asylum will be treated in accordance with the following principles in the third country concerned:
Države članice lahko uporabljajo pojem varne tretje države samo, kadar tretja država izpolni naslednje kriterije :
Member States may apply the safe third country concept only where the third country fulfils the following criteria :
O pojmu „varna država“: Na vprašanje, ali je neka tretja država „varna“ za vrnitev prosilcev za azil, ni mogoče odgovoriti v splošnem smislu, na primer z „državno“ določitvijo parlamenta, za vse prosilce za azil v vseh okoliščinah.
On the concept of "safe country": The question of whether a particular third country is ‘safe’ for the purpose of returning an asylum-seeker cannot be answered in a generic fashion, for example by ‘national’ designation of parliament, for all asylum-seekers in all circumstances.
Na vprašanje, ali se prosilce za azil lahko pošlje v tretje države za določitev njihovega zahtevka, je treba odgovoriti na individualni ravni.
The question of whether asylum-seekers can be sent to a third country for determination of their claim must be answered on an individual basis.
V nasprotnem primeru se poveča tveganje verižnega vračanja tujcev.
If not, the risk of chain refoulement arises.
Tudi tretje države morajo imeti vlogo pri opredelitvi „varnosti“ države in prav tako natančno izpolnjevati merila.
Also third countries have a role to play in the definition of the "safety" of a country and have to follow precise criteria.
Člen 27, odstavek 1, točka a
Article 27, paragraph 1, point (a)
(a) življenje in svoboda nista ogroženi zaradi rase, vere, državljanstva, pripadnosti določeni družbeni skupini ali političnega prepričanja ; in da
(a) life and liberty are not threatened on account of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion ; and
(a) ratifikacija in izvajanje Ženevske konvencije in drugih mednarodnih pogodb o človekovih pravicah v praksi, zlasti v zvezi z načelom nevračanja; in da
(a) ratification and implementation in practice of the Geneva Convention and other international human rights treaties, in particular with reference to the principle of non-refoulement ; and
Sklicevanje na člen 27(1)(a)(novo) Ženevske konvencije bo zajemalo tudi to točko.
Reference to the Geneva Convention on Article 27, paragraph 1, point a (new) will cover this point as well.
Člen 27, odstavek 1, točka b
Article 27, paragraph 1, point (b)
(b) v skladu z Ženevsko konvencijo se spoštuje načelo nevračanja; prav tako
(b) the principle of non-refoulement in accordance with the Geneva Convention is respected; and
(b) v skladu z Ženevsko konvencijo se zlasti spoštuje načelo nevračanja; prav tako
(b) the principle of non-refoulement in accordance with the Geneva Convention is in particular respected; and
Načelo nevračanja tujcev je osnovno, a ne edino načelo, ki ga je treba spoštovati v skladu z Ženevsko konvencijo.
The non-refoulement principle is fundamental but not the only one to be respected under the Geneva Convention.
Člen 27, odstavek 2, točka a
Article 27, paragraph 2, point (a)
(a) pravili, ki zahtevajo povezavo med osebo, ki išče azil, in zadevno tretjo državo, na podlagi katerih bi bilo upravičeno, da ta oseba odide v to državo;
(a) rules requiring a connection between the person seeking asylum and the third country concerned based on which it would be reasonable for that person to go to that country;
(a) pravili, ki zahtevajo smiselno povezavo med osebo, ki išče azil, in zadevno tretjo državo, na podlagi katerih bi bilo upravičeno, da ta oseba odide v to državo;
(a) rules requiring a meaningful link between the person seeking asylum and the third country concerned based on which it would be reasonable for that person to go to that country;
„Smiselna povezava“ je bolj primerna kot samo „povezava“.
"Meaningful link" is more appropriate than just "connection".
Člen 27, odstavek 2, točka (c)
Article 27, paragraph 2, point (c)
(c) pravili, ki v skladu z mednarodno zakonodajo dopuščajo posamično preučitev, ali je zadevna tretja država za določenega prosilca varna , in ki omogočajo vsaj, da prosilec ugovarja uporabi pojma varne tretje države na podlagi dejstva, da bo podvržen mučenju, krutemu, nečloveškemu ali ponižujočemu ravnanju ali kaznovanju.
(c) rules, in accordance with international law, allowing an individual examination of whether the third country concerned is safe for a particular applicant which, as a minimum, shall permit the applicant to challenge the application of the safe third country concept on the grounds that he/she would be subjected to torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
(c) pravili, ki v skladu z mednarodno zakonodajo in zlasti Ženevsko konvencijo dopuščajo posamično preučitev, ali je zadevna tretja država za določenega prosilca varna.
(c) rules, in accordance with international law and, specifically, the Geneva Convention , allowing an individual examination of whether the third country concerned is safe for a particular applicant.
Zadostuje sklicevanje na mednarodno pravo in Konvencijo iz leta 1951.
Reference to international law and the 1951 Convention will suffice.
Člen 27, odstavek 2, točka (ca) (novo)
Article 27, paragraph 2, point (c a) (new)
(ca) učinkovito možnostjo prosilcev za azil za izpodbijanje domnev o varnosti, vključno na prvi stopnji, celo na pospešeni ravni.
(ca) the effective possibility for the applicants for asylum to rebut the presumption of safety, including in the first instance, even if on an accelerated basis.
Možnost izpodbijanja domneve o varnosti je pogoj za sprejetje načela „varne države“.
The possibility to rebut the presumption of safety is the condition sine qua non for the acceptance of the "safe country" principle.
Ocenjevanje tveganja v izvorni državi je treba vedno izvajati na individualni ravni, raje kot na splošni domnevi o načelih, povezanih z državo.
The assessment of risk in the country of origin should always be conducted on an individual basis rather than on a general presumption on country-related criteria.
Kadar tretja država zadevnemu prosilcu za azil ne dovoli vstopa na njeno ozemlje, države članice zagotovijo dostop do postopka v skladu z osnovnimi načeli in jamstvi iz Poglavja II.
Where the third country does not permit the applicant for asylum in question to enter its territory, Member States shall ensure that access to a procedure is given in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees described in Chapter II.
Kadar tretja država zadevnemu prosilcu za azil ne dovoli vstopa na njeno ozemlje, države članice zagotovijo dostop do azilnega postopka v skladu z osnovnimi načeli in jamstvi iz Poglavja II.
Where the third country does not permit the applicant for asylum in question to enter its territory, Member States shall ensure that access to an asylum procedure is given in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees described in Chapter II.