natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
(9) Za zagotovitev enotne razlage in preglednosti skupne kategorizacije bi morala vsaka država članica predložiti seznam nacionalnih kaznivih dejanj in kazni, ki spadajo v posamezne kategorije in bi bile skupaj s kratkim opisom sestavnih elementov kaznivega dejanja navedene v zadevnih razpredelnicah, pa tudi seznam nacionalnih kazenskih sodišč.
(9) In order to ensure the mutual understanding and transparency of the common categorisation, each Member State should submit the list of national offences and sanctions falling in each category referred to in the respective table, together with a short description of the constitutive elements of the offence, as well as the list of national criminal courts.
Zaradi pogosto bistvenih razlik med opredelitvami vrst kaznivih dejanj v različnih državah članicah se zdi zelo umestno, da osebe, ki bodo morale uporabiti izpiske iz kazenske evidence, razpolagajo s kar se da obsežnimi informacijami.
The often substantial differences between the definition of types of offence in the various Member States make it all the more appropriate for as much information as possible to be provided to the persons who will have to use the criminal record extracts.
Predlog spremembe se navezuje na predlog spremembe 8 v nadaljevanju.
This amendment is linked to Amendment 8 below.
(9a) Namen referenčnih razpredelnic iz priloge A in B nikakor ni uskladiti vrst kaznivih dejanj ali zanje določenih kazni, kar bo še naprej urejalo nacionalno pravo.
(9 a) Th e reference tables contained in Annexes A and B do not in any way aim to harmonise the types of offence or the sanctions set out therein , which will continue to be governed by national la w .
Jasno mora biti, da sklep ni namenjen usklajevanju materialnega kazenskega prava, pač pa je njegov namen olajšati izmenjavo informacij iz kazenskih evidenc.
It should be made clear that this decision is not aimed at harmonising substantive criminal law, but rather at facilitating the exchange of information extracted from the criminal record.
(13) Referenčni razpredelnici kategorij kaznivih dejanj in kazni, pa tudi tehnični standardi, ki se uporabljajo za izmenjavo informacij, bi zahtevali nenehne preglede in redne posodobitve.
(13) Both reference tables of categories of offences and sanctions, as well the technical standards used for the exchange of information should require constant revision and regular updates.
Izvedbena pooblastila v zvezi s tem so bila zato dodeljena Komisiji, ki ji pomaga odbor.
Implementing powers in this respect were therefore delegated to the Commission assisted by a Committee.
Za sprejetje ukrepov, potrebnih za izvajanje tega sklepa, bi se moral smiselno uporabljati regulativni postopek v okviru zakonodaje Skupnosti.
The regulatory procedure under Community law should apply mutatis mutandis for the adoption of measures necessary for the implementation of this Decision.
(13) Referenčni razpredelnici kategorij kaznivih dejanj in kazni, pa tudi tehnični standardi, ki se uporabljajo za izmenjavo informacij, bi zahtevali nenehne preglede in redne posodobitve.
(13) Both reference tables of categories of offences and sanctions, as well the technical standards used for the exchange of information , should require constant revision and regular updates.
(14) Pri računalniško vodeni izmenjavi informacij iz kazenskih evidenc držav članic bi bilo treba uporabljati Okvirni sklep 2008/XX/PNZ o varstvu osebnih podatkov, ki se obdelujejo v okviru policijskega in pravosodnega sodelovanja v kazenskih zadevah.
(14) Framework Decision 2008/XX/JHA on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial co-operation in criminal matters should apply in the context the computerised exchange of information extracted from criminal records of Member States.
(14) V zvezi s tem je izjemno pomembno, da se čim prej sprejme Okvirni sklep Sveta 2008/XX/PNZ o varstvu osebnih podatkov, ki se obdelujejo v okviru policijskega in pravosodnega sodelovanja v kazenskih zadevah , s katerim bo zagotovljena ustrezna raven varstva podatkov in bo vključeval obdelavo osebnih podatkov na nacionalni ravni .
(14) In this context it is of paramount importance to adopt as soon as possible Council Framework Decision 2008/XX/JHA on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, providing for an adequate level of data protection and including the processing of personal data at national level.
Člen 3 - odstavek 5
Article 3 – paragraph 5
Za uspešno delovanje sistema ECRIS zagotovi Komisija storitve splošne podpore in spremljanja.
In order to ensure efficient operation of ECRIS, the Commission shall provide general support and monitoring services.
Za uspešno delovanje sistema ECRIS zagotovi Komisija storitve splošne podpore in spremljanja ter preverja, ali se ukrepi iz člena 6 izvajajo pravilno .
In order to ensure efficient operation of ECRIS, the Commission shall provide general support and monitoring services and verif y th at the measures set out in A rticl e 6 are correctly implemented.
Komisija ima pregled nad stanjem in ustrezno tehnično znanje, zato mora biti njena naloga, da usklajuje in nadzoruje izvajanje sistema povezav.
The Commission has both an overview of the situation and the relevant technical expertise, and must therefore play a coordinating and supervisory role in the implementation of the interconnection system.
Zajema lahko tudi kratek opis sestavnih elementov kaznivega dejanja;
It may also include a short description of the constitutive elements of the offence;
Zajema tudi kratek opis sestavnih elementov kaznivega dejanja;
It shall also include a short description of the constitutive elements of the offence;
Če bi bila vključitev kratkega opisa sestavnih elementov kaznivega dejanja obvezna, bi postala izmenjava informacij med zadevnimi državami članicami bolj učinkovita.
Making the inclusion of a short description of the constitutive elements of a criminal offence mandatory would make the exchange of information between the respective Member States more effective.
Sistemi kazenskega prava držav članic se lahko zelo razlikujejo.
The criminal law systems of the Member States can differ greatly.
Države članice pogosto nimajo istih kaznivih dejanj in prav lahko se zgodi, da se nekaj, kar v eni državi članici šteje za kaznivo dejanje, po zakonodaji druge države članice sploh ne kaznuje.
Often Member States do not even have the same criminal offences, i.e. what may be regarded as an offence in one Member State can be deemed not punishable under the laws of another.
Zato bi kratek opis organom države članice prosilke pomagal bolje razumeti, za kakšno kaznivo dejanje gre.
Thus, such a short description will help the authorities of the requesting Member State to better understand the nature of the offence in question.
Člen 5 – odstavek 1 – točka a – alineja 2 (novo)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a – subparagraph 2 (new)
za prevod opisa nacionalnega kaznivega dejanja iz izvirnega jezika, v katerem je bil predložen, je zadolžena in pristojna izključno posamezna država članica, ki zahteva prevod, in tega ECRIS ne zagotavlja.
T he translation of a description of a national offence from the original language of submission shall be the task and responsibility solely of each individual Member State requesting a translation and shall not be done by ECRIS.
Ko je prevod izdelan, ECRIS ponudi možnost njegovega vnosa v podatkovno zbirko;
Once a translation has been completed, ECRIS shall offer the option of adding it to the database ;
Sistematično prevajanje opisa vseh oznak nacionalnih kaznivih dejanj, ki jih je na tisoče, v vse jezike držav članic, bi zahtevalo na tisoče ur dela in neznano količino denarnih sredstev.
The systematic translation of a description of each national offence code, of which there are thousands, into each Member State language would require thousands of hours of work and an unknown amount in costs.
Če bi prevode zahtevali pred dokončanjem ECRIS, bi s tem za več let preprečili začetek njegovega delovanja.
If all translations are required before completion of the ECRIS, this would prevent the ECRIS from coming into service for years.
Temu se moramo izogniti.
This must be prevented.
Ko pa bi nacionalno sodišče prevedlo opis, bi se ta informacija lahko vnesla v ECRIS, s čemer bi pripomogli k prihodnjem komuniciranju in v prihodnosti preprečili podvajanje prevodov.
At the same time, once a national court has translated the description, this information should be able to be added into the ECRIS as an aid to future communication and to prevent future duplications of translations.
Člen 6 - uvodni del
Article 6 – introductory part
Skladno s postopkom iz člena 7 se sprejmejo naslednji izvedbeni ukrepi:
The following implementing measures shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 7 :
Po potrebi in v skladu s členom 34(2)(c) in členom 39 Pogodbe o EU Komisija predlaga Svetu, naj sprejme vse potrebne ukrepe, da zagotovi optimalno delovanje sistema ECRIS in njegovo interoperabilnost z nacionalnimi sistemi, kot so na primer:
Where necessary, and in accordance with A rticl e 34 ( 2 )( c) and Article 39 of the EU Treaty , the Commission shall propose th at th e Council adopt all the m ea sure s needed to ensure an optimum functioning of ECRIS and its i nteroperabilit y with national systems, such as :
Člen 7
Articl e 7
Postopek v odboru
Committee procedure
Pri sklicevanju na ta člen Komisiji pomaga regulativni odbor, ki ga sestavljajo predstavniki držav članic, predseduje pa mu predstavnik Komisije (v nadaljnjem besedilu „odbor“).
Where reference is made to this Article, the Commission shall be assisted by a regulatory committee composed of representatives of the Member States and chaired by a representative of the Commission (the "Committee").
Odbor sprejme svoj poslovnik.
The Committee shall adopt its rules of procedure .
Odbor posreduje svoje mnenje o osnutku v roku, ki ga lahko določi predsednik glede na nujnost zadeve.
The Committee shall deliver its opinion on the draft within a time limit which the chairman may lay down according to the urgency of the matter.
V primeru sklepov, ki naj jih sprejme Svet na predlog Komisije, se mnenje sprejme z večino, določeno v členu 205(2) in (4) Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti.
The opinion shall be delivered by the majority laid down in Article 205(2) and (4) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, in the case of decisions which the Council is required to adopt on a proposal from the Commission.
Glasovi predstavnikov držav članic znotraj odbora se ponderirajo skladno z navedenim členom.
The votes of the representatives of the Member States within the Committee shall be weighted in the manner set out in that Article.
Predsednik ne glasuje.
The chairman shall not vote .
Komisija sprejme predvidene ukrepe, če so v skladu z mnenjem odbora.
The Commission shall adopt the measures envisaged if they are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee .
Če predvideni ukrepi niso v skladu z mnenjem odbora ali če mnenje ni dano, Komisija brez odlašanja posreduje Svetu predlog ukrepov, ki jih je treba sprejeti, in o tem obvesti Evropski parlament.
If the measures envisaged are not in accordance with the opinion of the Committee, or if no opinion is delivered, the Commission shall without delay submit to the Council a proposal relating to the measures to be taken and shall inform the European Parliament thereof .
Svet lahko o predlogu odloča s kvalificirano večino v treh mesecih od datuma, ko mu je bila zadeva predložena.
The Council may act by qualified majority on the proposal, within three months from the date of referral to the Council.
Če se v tem obdobju Svet s kvalificirano večino odloči, da nasprotuje predlogu, ga Komisija ponovno prouči.
If within that period the Council has indicated by qualified majority that it opposes the proposal, the Commission shall re-examine it.
Svetu lahko predloži spremenjeni predlog, ponovno predloži svoj predlog ali predstavi zakonodajni predlog na podlagi Pogodbe.
It may submit an amended proposal to the Council, re-submit its proposal or present a legislative proposal on the basis of the Treaty.
Če po izteku navedenega Svet ne sprejme predlaganega izvedbenega akta niti ne nasprotuje predlogu izvedbenih ukrepov, Komisija sprejme predlagani izvedbeni akt.
If, on the expiry of that period, the Council has neither adopted the proposed implementing act nor indicated its opposition to the proposal for implementing measures, the proposed implementing act shall be adopted by the Commission.
Obrazložitev k predlogom sprememb 4, 9 in 10
Justification for amendments 4, 9 and 10
Sodišče evropskih Skupnosti je nedavno potrdilo (zadeva C-133/06) načelo, da pravila o načinu sprejemanja odločitev v institucijah Skupnosti določa Pogodba in da jih ne morejo po svoje tolmačiti ne države članice ne institucije same.
The Court of Justice (Case C-133/06) has recently confirmed the principle that ‘the rules regarding the manner in which the Community institutions arrive at their decisions are laid down in the Treaty and are not at the disposal of the Member States or of the institutions themselves’.
Predlogi sprememb 4, 9 in 10 so v skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča evropskih Skupnosti in so rezultat doslednega tolmačenja Pogodbe o Evropski uniji, ki niti ne predvideva tako imenovane komitologije za področja, katera ureja Naslov VI, niti ne dovoljuje oblikovanja sekundarnih pravnih podlag izven primerov, ki jih urejajo pogodbe.
Amendments 4, 9 and 10 are in line with the case law of the Court, and are the product of a strict interpretation of the Treaty on European Union, which does not provide for so-called ‘comitology’ for the areas governed by Title VI, or authorise the creation of secondary legal bases outside the cases covered by the Treaties.
Sistem, ki je oblikovan v Naslovu VI, in zlasti skupek določb iz členov 34 in 39 namreč določata, da je treba vse izvedbene ukrepe sprejeti v skladu s postopkom iz člena 39.
The system established in Title VI, and in particular the combined provisions of Articles 34 and 39, in fact provides that any measures implementing decisions must be adopted in accordance with the procedure indicated in Article 39.
Izmenjava informacij iz kazenskih evidenc v svojem bistvu še vedno temelji na pravilih iz Konvencije o medsebojni pravni pomoči v kazenskih zadevah, ki jo je Svet Evrope sprejel leta 1959, zlasti na členih 13 in 22 te konvencije, ki navajata, da naj bi tovrstne informacije vsaj enkrat letno posredovala pravosodna ministrstva.
The exchange of information extracted from criminal records is still based essentially on the rules laid down in the Convention on mutual assistance in criminal matters, adopted by the Council of Europe in 1959, and in particular Articles 13 and 22 thereof, which provide that such information should be communicated by the Ministries of Justice at least once a year.
Evropska komisija je opozorila na neučinkovitost in izjemno počasnost tega sistema, zato je po letu 2005 sprožila več regulativnih pobud, s katerimi je želela na eni strani urediti in poenostaviti izmenjavo izpiskov iz kazenskih evidenc, na drugi strani pa postaviti pravila za njihovo uporabo v državah članicah prejemnicah.
The European Commission, noting the inefficiency and the exceptional slowness of that system, brought forward range of regulatory initiatives from 2005 onwards, aimed on the one hand at regulating and facilitating the exchange of criminal record extracts and, on the other, at establishing rules on the use that recipient Member States could make of such extracts.
Z okvirnim sklepom je bilo uveljavljeno načelo o enakovrednosti sodb, ki jih izrečejo nacionalni pravosodni organi, in sodb, ki jih izrečejo pravosodni organi druge države članice.
That framework decision establishes the principle of equivalence between judgements handed down by a national judicial authority and judgements handed down by the judicial authority of another Member State.
Kronološko gledano je bil Sklep Sveta 2005/876/PNZ z dne 21. novembra 2005 o izmenjavi podatkov iz kazenskih evidenc prvi ukrep, ki ureja in poenostavlja izmenjavo informacij.
Council Decision 2005/876/JHA of 21 November 2005 on the exchange of information extracted from the criminal record is, chronologically, the first measure aimed at regulating and facilitating the exchange of information.
Sklep temelji na načelu, da vsaka država članica sama ureja podatke o svojih državljanih, in določa, da morajo biti podatki iz kazenskih evidenc državi članici, ki jih je zaprosila, poslani v roku 10 dni, in sicer na obrazcu, predvidenem v ta namen.
It is based on the principle of each Member State managing the information relating to its own nationals and stipulates that the information extracted from the criminal record must be sent to the requesting Member State within 10 days of the request, using the form provided for that purpose.
Prejeti podatki se potem lahko uporabijo samo za namen, za katerega so bili zaprošeni.
The information received may only be used for the purpose for which it was requested.
S predlogom Okvirnega sklepa o pripravi in vsebini izmenjave podatkov, izpisanih iz kazenske evidence, med državami članicami ( KOM(2005)0690 ), ki ga je proti koncu leta 2005 predložila Evropska komisija, naj bi se ta pravni okvir razširil.
The proposal for a framework decision on the organisation and content of the exchange of information extracted from criminal records between Member States ( COM(2005)0690 ), presented by the European Commission in late 2005, was designed to enlarge upon that legal framework.
Predlog je zasnovan na načelu, da bi morale biti države članice, katerih državljan je obsojenec, referenčne točke za vse zahtevke v zvezi s kazensko evidenco, s čimer bi bile na voljo tudi obsodbe, izrečene v drugih državah članicah.
It develops on the basic principle that the Member State of which the convicted person is a national should be the point of reference for all requests relating to the criminal record, in order to ensure that any sentences passed in other Member States are also made available.
Državam članicam, v katerih je bila izrečena sodba, nalaga dolžnost, da sodbe dopolnijo s podatki o državljanstvu obtožene osebe in da redno sporočajo vsakršne dodatne ali ustrezne informacije državi članici, katere državljanstvo ima ta oseba.
It also imposes on the Member State in which a judgement is handed down the obligation to ensure that all judgements are accompanied by information on the nationality of the convicted person, and to update and communicate any relevant information to the Member State of which that person is a national.
Svet PNZ je junija 2007 dosegel politični dogovor o predlogu okvirnega sklepa, ki bo vseboval pravila iz sklepa, sprejetega leta 2005, in bo zato slednjega po začetku veljavnosti nadomestil.
In June 2007, the JHA Council reached political agreement on the proposal for a framework decision, which incorporates the rules laid down in the 2005 decision and once in force will replace it.
Predlog sklepa o ECRIS naj bi – kot določa člen 11 okvirnega sklepa – po tehnični in IT plati nadomestil sistem, vzpostavljen s prejšnjimi regulativnimi instrumenti.
The proposal for a decision concerning ECRIS is intended, as required by Article 11 of the framework decision, to supplement in technical and IT terms the system set up by the previous regulatory instruments.
Naj ponovimo, da se osnovna načela ne bodo spremenila:
To repeat, there is no change in the basic principles:
· referenčna točka bo tudi vnaprej država članica, katere državljanstvo ima obsojena oseba,
· the point of reference remains the Member State of which the convicted person has nationality;
· podatki bodo shranjeni samo v centralni nacionalni evidenci in ne bodo neposredno dostopni preko evidenc drugih držav članic,
· the information is only kept in the central national records and is not directly accessible to the records of the other Member States;
· države članice bodo upravljale in posodabljale lastne podatkovne zbirke.
· the Member States manage and update their own databases.
Poleg tega so bile za lažjo izmenjavo informacij zasnovane referenčne kode za različne kategorije kaznivih dejanj (priloga A) in kazni (priloga B).
Besides this, in order to facilitate the exchange of information, reference codes have been devised for the various categories of offences (Annex A) and sanctions (Annex B).
Naj ob tem opozorimo na pilotni projekt, ki je stekel junija 2006 in v katerem sodelujejo Belgija, Češka republika, Francija, Nemčija, Luksemburg in Španija.
It should also be pointed out that a pilot project was launched in June 2006, involving Belgium, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Luxembourg and Spain, to electronically interconnect the central records of those countries.
Cilj projekta je elektronsko povezati centralne evidence sodelujočih držav, glede na dobre rezultate pa so se projektu kasneje priključile še druge države.
In view of the success of that project, other countries have subsequently also subscribed to it.
Stališče poročevalca
R apporteur’s position
To je razlog, zakaj v predlogu spremembe 1 jasno navajamo, da je ta regulativni instrument izvedbenega značaja in da njegov namen ni vzpostaviti novih pravil, ampak opremiti obstoječa pravila s tehničnimi sredstvi, da bodo lahko postala operativna.
In that perspective, Amendment 1 sets out to make it clear that this regulatory instrument is of an implementing nature, and emphasises that it does not aim to establish new rules, but rather to confer on those which already exist the technical means they need to become operational.
Pojasnilo vsebine predloga prinaša tudi predlog spremembe 3, ki navaja, da namen referenčnih razpredelnic iz prilog A in B ni uskladiti vrst kaznivih dejanj ali določenih kazni, saj bo to še naprej urejalo nacionalno pravo.
Amendment 3 is also designed to clarify the tenor of the proposal, specifying that Annexes A and B are not intended to harmonise the types of offence and sanctions set out therein, which will instead continue to be governed by national law.
V želji, da bi našla skupno točko za 27 različnih pravosodnih sistemov s povsem ločenimi pravno-družbenimi značilnostmi, je Komisija kazniva dejanja združila v kategorije, ki so predstavljene v prilogi A.
The need to find a common focal point for 27 different legal systems, all of which have their own judicial and social sensitivities, has led the Commission to synthesise the criminal offences into the categories set out in Annex A. The system proposed consists of clear and concise records which have the great merit of being ‘readable’ by all the Member States, but which are liable, at least in some cases, to be inadequate or not fully relevant.
Predlagani sistem prinaša jasne in natančne evidence, ki jih resnično odlikuje njihova „berljivost“ za vse države članice, čeprav se lahko vsaj v nekaterih primerih izkažejo kot neprimerne ali ne povsem ustrezne.
Being aware of the inevitable approximation resulting from this synthesis, the Commission has also made provision for ‘open’ categories.
Seveda se je Komisija zavedela, da takšno spajanje neizbežno vodi v približke, zato je predvidela t.i. odprte kategorije, ki pa so že po definiciji še bolj nedorečene.
However, these are by definition even more vague.
Zato je treba prekomerno posploševanje popraviti in pravosodne organe oskrbeti z vsemi kognitivnimi instrumenti, ki jih potrebujejo za pravilno razumevanje in kar najučinkovitejšo razlago posredovanih podatkov.
This over-generalisation must therefore be remedied by providing the judicial authorities with all the cognitive tools needed to understand and interpret the information available as effectively as possible.
To še prav posebej velja za sestavne elemente kaznivih dejanj, ki morajo biti na razpolago pravosodnim organom, zlasti če kaznivo dejanje ne sodi v eno od podkategorij, ampak v odprto kategorijo.
This specifically refers to the constitutive elements of the offence, which must be made accessible to the judicial authorities, especially when the offence does not fit into any of the sub-categories, but belongs to an open category.