natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
7. priznava, da široko članstvo v UNHRC in sodelovanje številnih držav opazovalk zagotavlja, da so praktično vse države vključene v njegove razprave; z mislijo na prihodnje poročilo leta 2011 meni, da bi lahko preučili možnost odprtja UNHRC za splošno članstvo, hkrati pa bi bila koristna manjša sestava;
Acknowledges that the broad membership of the UNHRC and the participation of many observer states ensures that virtually all countries are involved in its debates; considers, looking ahead to the 2011 review, that the possibility of opening up the UNHRC to universal membership could be explored, while a smaller composition could prove to be beneficial;
9. izraža veliko zaskrbljenost zaradi vse večjega ogrožanja načela univerzalnosti človekovih pravic, kar je razvidno zlasti iz poskusov nekaterih držav, da bi uvedle omejitve glede priznanih človekovih pravic, kot je svoboda izražanja, ali da bi človekove pravice razlagale glede na kulturno, ideološko ali tradicionalno ozadje; poziva EU, naj ostane pozorna glede teh poskusov in trdno zagovarja načela univerzalnosti, neločljivosti in medsebojne odvisnosti človekovih pravic;
Expresses strong concern at the fact that the principle of the universality of human rights is being increasingly put at risk, as is illustrated in particular by the attempts on the part of certain countries to introduce limits to well-recognised human rights, such as freedom of expression, or to interpret human rights against a cultural, ideological or traditional background; calls on the EU to remain vigilant vis-à-vis these attempts and to strongly defend the principles of the universality, indivisibility and interdependence of human rights;
Posebni postopki
Special Procedures
Splošni redni pregled
Universal Periodic Review
20. obžaluje, da prvi dve zasedanji nista povsem izpolnili pričakovanj glede postopka, ki mora potekati „objektivno, pregledno, neselektivno, konstruktivno, brez konfliktov in politizacije“
Regrets that these first two sessions have not entirely lived up to expectations with regard to an “objective, transparent, non-selective, constructive, non-confrontational and non-politicized” process
Resolucija UNHRC 5/1 z dne 18. junija 2007. ;
UNHRC Resolution 5/1 of 18 June 2007. ;
23. obsoja uporabo političnih zavezništev za zaščito nekaterih držav pred pregledom, namesto da bi se kritično ocenjevala stanje in zaščita človekovih pravic, kar resno ogroža namen splošnega rednega pregleda; ugotavlja, da je ta praksa dosegla nevarno raven pri pregledu Tunizije, ki je vključeval izjave, ki so se močno razlikovale od ugotovitev neodvisnih strokovnjakov; ugotavlja pa, da ta primer očitno ni odražal trenda;
Denounces the use of political alliances to shield certain States from scrutiny rather than to critically assess human rights conditions and protections, which seriously undermines the very purpose of the UPR; notes that this practice reached a dangerous level in the review of Tunisia, which contained declarations significantly contradicting independent experts' findings; notes, however, that that particular review did not seem to reflect a trend;
29. poziva vse države, naj na podlagi priporočil iz pregleda izvedejo obsežno nacionalno posvetovanje; poziva države članice, naj nadalje preučijo, kako je mogoče ta priporočila uporabiti pri razvoju programov tehnične pomoči;
Calls on all States to carry out an extensive national consultation following the review, on the basis of its recommendations; calls on the EU to investigate further how those recommendations can be used in the development of technical assistance programmes;
Preglednost in sodelovanje civilne družbe pri delu UNHRC
Transparency and the participation of civil society in the work of the UNHRC
36. ponovno poudarja svoje mnenje, da je UVKČP ključen organ v Združenih narodih, saj ima bistveno vlogo pri zaščiti in spoštovanju človekovih pravic tako, da te pravice vključuje v celoten sistem ZN in v vse ustrezne organizacije, zlasti glede dejavnosti, ki so povezane s ponovno vzpostavitvijo ali krepitvijo miru, razvojem ali humanitarnimi dejavnostmi;
Reaffirms its opinion that the OHCHR is a key body within the United Nations system since it plays a crucial role in protecting and upholding human rights by mainstreaming those rights throughout the UN system and within all relevant organisations, notably in connection with activities linked to the restoration or strengthening of peace, development and humanitarian action;
39. ceni delo Louise Arbour kot vodje UVKČP, poleg zavezanosti in integritete, ki ju je pokazala, ter verjame, da bo njena naslednica, Navanethem Pillay, delala s podobnim navdušenjem in se zmogla soočiti z izzivi tega delovnega mesta;
Expresses its appreciation of the work of Ms Louise Arbour as head of the OHCHR, together with the commitment and integrity that she has shown, and is confident that her successor, Ms Navanethem Pillay, will engage with similar enthusiasm and live up to the challenges of the post;
Vloga EU v UNHRC
The EU's role in the UNHRC
43. ugotavlja, da so države članice EU, ki sodelujejo v UNHRC, razdeljene v dve regionalni skupini, in sicer na skupino zahodnoevropskih držav in skupino vzhodnoevropskih držav; ugotavlja, da EU nasprotuje predstavitvi zaprtih kandidaturnih list s strani regij, kar vodi v to, da države članice EU med seboj tekmujejo za izvolitev v UNHRC;
Takes note that the EU Member States participating in the UNHRC are split into two regional groupings, namely the Western European States group and the Eastern European States group; notes that the EU opposes the presentation of “clean slates” by regions, which results, effectively, in EU Member States competing between themselves for election to the UNHRC;
45. ugotavlja, da je EU znotraj UNHRC v številčni manjšini, kar gotovo predstavlja izziv pri uveljavljanju njenih stališč; pozdravlja prakso „ozaveščanja“ drugih članic UNHRC in „porazdelitve bremena“ med državami članicami EU, ki je bila izpostavljena med slovenskim predsedovanjem; poziva države članice EU, da še naprej razvijajo in krepijo to prakso;
Notes that the EU finds itself in a numerical minority within the UNHRC, which certainly presents a challenge when it comes to making its voice heard; welcomes the practice put forward during the Slovenian presidency of “outreach” towards other UNHRC members and burden-sharing between EU Member States; calls on the EU Member States to further develop and strengthen this practice;
48. obžaluje, da delno zaradi časa in prizadevanj, ki so potrebni za doseganje skupnega stališča, EU ni mogla učinkovito izvajati vpliva v širšem sistemu ZN; poziva EU, da ostane zavezana doseganju skupnega stališča, obenem pa postane bolj prilagodljiva glede manj pomembnih vprašanj, da bo lahko v pogajanjih o temeljnih vprašanjih ukrepala hitreje in učinkoviteje;
Regrets that, partly due to the time and effort needed to reach a common position, the EU has not been able to exercise influence effectively within the wider UN system; calls on the EU, while remaining committed to achieving a common position, to increase its flexibility on minor issues so as to become capable of acting more rapidly and efficiently in negotiations on fundamental issues;
51. poziva EU in države članice, da bolj zavzeto sodelujejo z drugimi demokratičnimi članicami UNHRC, vključno z državami iz afriške in azijske skupine ter predvsem z demokratičnimi državami, ki spoštujejo mednarodno vladavino prava; meni, da nigerijsko predsedovanje UNHRC pomeni priložnost za EU v zvezi s tem;
Calls on the EU and its Member States to interact more energetically with other democratic members of the UNHRC, including countries within the African and Asian groups, and especially with democratic states abiding by the international rule of law; considers that the Nigerian Presidency of the UNHRC constitutes a window of opportunity for the EU in this respect;
53. poziva k večjemu usklajevanju in sodelovanju med ustreznimi delovnimi skupinami Sveta EU, ki delujejo v Bruslju, in uradi EU ter stalnimi predstavništvi držav članic v New Yorku in Ženevi, v zvezi s tem pozdravlja učinkovito decentralizacijo vsakodnevnega odločanja iz Bruslja v Ženevo, pri čemer prestolnici ohranjata pomembno usklajevalno vlogo;
Calls for closer coordination and cooperation between the relevant Brussels-based working groups of the Council of the EU and the EU Offices and the EU Member States' Permanent Representations in New York and Geneva; in this respect, welcomes the effective decentralisation of day-to-day decision-making from Brussels to Geneva, with capitals retaining an important coordinating role;
55. obžaluje, da EU ni mogla predstaviti pomembnih prednostnih nalog za delo UNHRC in je bila večkrat prisiljena v stališče „omejevanja škode“, kot zlasti v primeru „Kodeksa ravnanja glede posebnih postopkov“, ki ga je leta 2007 predlagala afriška skupina; poziva EU, da sprejme bolj proaktivno strategijo in podvoji svoja prizadevanja, da bi vplivala na program in razprave UNHRC;
Regrets the fact that the EU has not been able to present substantial priorities for the work of the UNHRC and has on several occasions been forced into a “damage limitation” attitude, as in the case, most notably, of the “Code of Conduct for Special Procedures” proposed in 2007 by the African Group; calls on the EU to adopt a more pro-active strategy and to redouble its efforts to influence the UNHRC's agenda and its debates;
57. spodbuja redno prisotnost delegacij Parlamenta na zasedanjih UNHRC v Ženevi; pozdravlja pobudo pododbora za človekove pravice, da na svoja srečanja povabi nosilce mandatov za posebne postopke in predsedstvo UNHRC, in poziva, naj se ta praksa nadaljuje;
Encourages the regular presence of Parliament's delegations at the sessions of the UNHRC in Geneva; welcomes the initiative of Parliament's Subcommittee on Human Rights to invite Special Procedures mandate-holders as well as the Presidency of the UNHRC to its meetings, and calls for this practice to be continued;
– ponovno potrdi in strogo zagovarja načela univerzalnosti, neločljivosti in medsebojne odvisnosti človekovih pravic;
– reaffirm and strongly defend the principles of the universality, indivisibility and interdependence of human rights;
– zagotovi ohranitev in okrepitev sposobnosti UNHRC za obravnavanje razmer v posameznih državah, vključno z mandati držav;
– ensure that the ability of the UNHRC to address country situations, including through country mandates, is preserved and reinforced;
– zagotovi neodvisnost in učinkovitost posebnih postopkov na splošno in si prizadeva za uresničitev obveznosti sodelovanja s posebnimi postopki za člane UNHRC;
– ensure the independence and effectiveness of Special Procedures in general, and work towards the realisation of the obligation to cooperate with Special Procedures for members of the UNHRC;
– si prizadeva za okrepitev neodvisnih mehanizmov za nadzor in ugotovitev v postopku splošnega rednega pregleda;
– work towards the strengthening of independent monitoring mechanisms and findings in the UPR process;
– ponovno potrdi posebno vlogo UNHRC kot glavnega in legitimnega mednarodnega foruma o človekovih pravicah in njegove dopolnilne vloge v zvezi z drugimi organi ZN;
– reaffirm the UNHRC's specific role as the principal and legitimate international human rights forum and its complementarity vis-à-vis other UN bodies;
– ščiti neodvisnost Urada visokega komisarja za človekove pravice;
– safeguard the independence of the OHCHR;
– krepi svojo strategijo za zunanje oblikovanje koalicije, predvsem z medregionalnimi pobudami;
– reinforce its external coalition-building strategy, notably through cross-regional initiatives;
59. naroči svojemu predsedniku, naj to resolucijo posreduje Svetu, Komisiji, vladam in parlamentom držav članic EU in članic UNHRC, predsedniku Generalne skupščine ZN, generalnemu sekretarju ZN in Uradu visokega komisarja za človekove pravice.
Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the EU and UNHRC Member States, the President of the UN General Assembly, the UN Secretary-General and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
Ustanovitev Sveta za človekove pravice je bila pogosto napovedana kot začetek novega obdobja za zaščito in spodbujanje človekovih pravic v sistemu ZN: dosežki Komisije za človekove pravice, kot je sistem neodvisnih strokovnjakov in posebni postopki, so bili jasno priznani in so se prenesli v nov organ, medtem ko so se novi mehanizmi in postopki, kot je zelo inovativen splošni redni pregled, oblikovali za spodbujanje verodostojnosti in zaščite človekovih pravic ter promocijskih sposobnosti Sveta za človekove pravice.
The establishment of the Human Rights Council has frequently been heralded as the beginning of a new era for the protection and promotion of human rights in the UN system: the achievements, such as the system of independent experts and Special Procedures, of the Human Rights Commission were clearly recognised and carried forward to the new body, while new mechanisms and procedures, such as the very innovative Universal Periodic Review, were created in order to enhance the credibility and the human rights protection and promotion ability of the Human Rights Council.
Vendar se slednji ni izognil vse pogostejšim obtožbam glede pomanjkanja nepristranskosti (odločitve Sveta naj bi postale prav tako politično obarvane kot v primeru nekdanje Komisija) in dvomom o njegovi učinkovitosti pri obravnavanju kršitev človekovih pravic po svetu.
The latter however has not escaped growing charges of a lack of impartiality (denouncing the Council became just as politicised as the late Commission) and doubts about its efficiency in addressing human rights violations around the world.
Glede na omenjeno in po 2 letih dela Sveta za človekove pravice, v katerih je bila institucionalna reforma natančno usklajena (in sicer glede podrobnosti splošnega rednega pregleda, s katerim se vsake štiri leta v medvladnem postopku v vsaki državi pregleda stanje na področju spoštovanja človekovih pravic, pregleda posebnih postopkov, ki so namenjeni „racionalizaciji“, sprejetja kodeksov ravnanja za nosilce mandatov in pregleda 1503 pritožbenih postopkov) in se je začela izvajati, bi bilo primerno oceniti, ali je svet uresničil svoj prvotni namen in izpolnil pričakovanja, tako da se analizira delovne postopke in rezultate, ki so bili doseženi v okviru dosedanjih 9 rednih in 7 izrednih zasedanj sveta ter v okviru 2 zasedanj, ki sta bili namenjeni splošnemu rednemu pregledu.
In the light of the above and after 2 years of work of the Council, during which the institutional reform was fine-tuned (namely with regard to the modalities of the Universal Periodic Review, by which every State's Human Rights record is reviewed every four years in an intergovernmental process, the review of Special procedures, aimed at "rationalising", the adoption of codes of conduct for mandate holders and the review of the 1503 complaints procedure) and put into practice, it seems useful to assess whether the Council has lived up to its original purpose and to the expectations it was entrusted with, by analysing the working procedures as well as the results they have produced during the 9 regular, 7 special sessions as well as 2 sessions dedicated to UPR which the Council has held so far.
Kljub nekaterim pomanjkljivostim ali nevarnim trendom, ki jih je mogoče opaziti v okviru Sveta za človekove pravice (kot so postopna odprava mandatov držav, težave pri obravnavanju razmer v posameznih državah na splošno ter selektivnost sveta v zvezi s tem, medvladni značaj postopka splošnega rednega pregleda, relativno slab dostop nevladnih organizacij znotraj tega postopka ter vse vidnejši poskusi „relativizacije“ človekovih pravic) ni namen vnaprej obsoditi ali povzročiti nezaupanje v svet, ki ostaja edinstven splošen forum o človekovih pravicah.
The idea is not, despite certain shortcomings or dangerous trends, to be noted in the Council, (such as the slow disappearance of country mandates, the difficulty to address country specific situations in general, and the selectiveness of the Council with this respect, the inter-governmental character of the UPR process and the relatively weak access of NGOs within this process, as well as about the more and more visible attempts to "relativise" Human Rights), to prejudge or discredit the Human Rights Council, which remains a unique universal human rights forum.
Namen je priznati njegove nedvomne dosežke in po potrebi opozoriti na možne izboljšave pri delovanju sveta, pa tudi svet umestiti glede na druge organe ZN, kot so tretji odbor, generalna skupščina in varnostni svet.
It is rather to acknowledge its undoubted achievements and where necessary, point out to the possible improvements in the functioning of the Council itself, but also in the positioning of the Council in relation to other UN bodies, such as the Third Committee, the General Assembly or the Security Council.
S tem se bo v poročilu preučila vloga, ki jo EU ima in bi jo lahko imela v zvezi s tem.
In doing so, the report will analyse the role the EU can and could play in this respect.
Gotovo ne smemo spregledati težav, ki jih ima EU pri zagovarjanju svojih stališč v okviru sveta, kjer so države, v katerih je stanje na področju človekovih pravic dobro, v manjšini in kjer sta dve regionalni, zelo enotni večinski skupini (organizacija islamskih držav in afriška skupina), skupaj z Rusijo in Kitajsko, nasprotnici v pogajanjih, v katerih se zaradi odsotnosti Združenih držav EU pogosto znajde skoraj sama.
Certainly, one should not overlook the difficulties for the EU of defending its positions in a Council where countries with solid human rights records are in minority and where two regional, strongly unified, majoritarian groups (the Organisation of Islamic Countries and the African group) allied with Russia and China are opponents in the negotiations, in which, due to the absence of the US, the EU often finds itself almost alone.
Prevelika samoosredotočenost EU je delno posledica njene specifičnosti in potrebe po tem, da se dolgo časa dogovarja o skupnih stališčih, vendar se zdi, da EU zaradi pomanjkanja načrtovanja, vodenja in precej obrambnega pristopa, bolj kot zaradi številk, ni uspela uspešno uresničiti pomembnih pobud na področju človekovih pravic.
The excessive self-centeredness of the EU is in part due to its specificity and the need to spend a lot of time elaborating common positions, however it seems that its lack of anticipation, leadership and a rather defensive approach have impeded the EU, more than the numerical reality, in successfully carrying out important human rights initiatives.
V poročilu bodo zato analizirani načini, v skladu s katerimi bi EU lahko izboljšala svoj vpliv v Svetu za človekove pravice in mu s tem dala nov zagon za učinkovitejše delovanje.
The report will therefore analyse the ways the EU could improve its influence in the HRC and, by doing so, give a new impetus to the Council, so it becomes a more effective functioning body.
Obenem pa glede na postopek pregleda sveta pet let po njegovi ustanovitvi, tj. leta 2011, to poročilo predlaga primerjalno analizo, ki naj se po možnosti ponovi tik pred pregledom.
At the same time, given the review procedure of the Council five years after its creation, i.e. in 2011, this report proposes as a benchmarking exercise, to be repeated possibly just before the review.
o predlogu Uredbe Sveta o spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 1338/2001 o določitvi ukrepov, potrebnih za zaščito eura pred ponarejanjem
on the draft Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 1338/2001 laying down measures necessary for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting
(Postopek posvetovanja – ponovno posvetovanje)
(Consultation procedure – renewed consultation)
– ob upoštevanju osnutka Sveta (14533/2008),
– having regard to the Council draft (14533/2008),
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Svetu ( KOM(2007)0525 ),
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council ( COM(2007)0525 ),
– ob upoštevanju svojega stališča z dne 7. junija 2008
– having regard to its position of 17 June 2008
Sprejeta besedila, P6_TA(2008)0280 . ,
Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2008)0280 . ,
– ob upoštevanju 123(4) 4 Pogodbe ES, v skladu s katerim se je Svet posvetoval s Parlamentom ( C6‑0395/2008 ),
– having regard to Article 123(4) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament ( C6‑0395/2008 ),
– ob upoštevanju členov 51, 43(1) in 55(3) svojega Poslovnika,
– having regard to Rules 51, 43(1) and 55(3) of its Rules of Procedure,
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za državljanske svoboščine, pravosodje in notranje zadeve ( A6‑0499/2008 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs ( A6‑0499/2008 ),
o predlogu Uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o spremembi Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 2252/2004 o standardih za varnostne značilnosti in biometrične podatke v potnih listih in potovalnih dokumentih, ki jih izdajo države članice
on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2252/2004 on standards for security features and biometrics in passports and travel documents issued by Member States
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu ( KOM(2007)0619 ),
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council ( COM(2007)0619 ),
– ob upoštevanju členov 251(2) in 62(2)(a) Pogodbe o ES, v skladu s katerima je Komisija predložila predlog Parlamentu ( C6-0359/2007 ),
– having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 62(2)(a) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament ( C6‑0359/2007 ),
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za državljanske svoboščine, pravosodje in notranje zadeve ( A6-0500/2008 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs ( A6‑0500/2008 ),
SPREMEMBE PARLAMENTA
AMENDMENTS BY PARLIAMENT
o spremembi Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 2252/2004 o standardih za varnostne značilnosti in biometrične podatke v potnih listih in potovalnih dokumentih, ki jih izdajo države članice
amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2252/2004 on standards for security features and biometrics in passports and travel documents issued by Member States
ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti in zlasti člena 62(2)(a) Pogodbe,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 62 (2) ( a) thereof,
(1) Evropski svet iz Soluna je potrdil, da je znotraj EU potreben usklajen pristop glede biometričnih identifikatorjev ali biometričnih podatkov za dokumente državljanov tretjih držav, potne liste državljanov EU in informacijska sistema (VIS in SIS II).
(1) The European Council of Thessaloniki confirmed that a coherent approach is needed in the EU on biometric identifiers or biometric data for documents for third - country nationals, EU citizen’s passports and information systems (VIS and SIS II).
(2) V zvezi s tem je Svet sprejel Uredbo (ES) št. 2252/2004 z dne 13. decembra 2004 o standardih za varnostne značilnosti in biometrične podatke v potnih listih in potovalnih dokumentih, ki jih izdajo države članice
(2) In this context, the Council has adopted Regulation (EC) No 2252/2004 of 13 December 2004 on standards for security features and biometrics in passports and travel documents issued by Member States
UL L 385, 29.12.2004, str.
OJ L 385, 29.12.2004, p.
1. , kot pomemben korak k uporabi novih elementov, ki zagotavljajo večjo varnost potovalnega dokumenta in vzpostavljajo zanesljivejšo povezavo med imetnikom in potnim listom kot pomemben prispevek k zagotavljanju zaščite pred zlorabo.
1. as an important step towards the use of new elements, which render the travel document more secure and establish a more reliable link between the holder and the passport as an important contribution to ensuring that it is protected against fraudulent use.
(3) Uredba (ES) št. 2252/2004 zagotavlja splošno obveznost dajanja prstnih odtisov, ki bodo shranjeni na brezkontaktnem čipu v potnem listu.
(3) Regulation (EC) No 2252/2004 provides for a general obligation to give fingerprints which will be stored on a contactless chip in the passport.