natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Nekatere države članice so pri izvajanju razvile boljšo prakso od drugih.
Some Members States have developed better practices that others in the field of implementation.
Združeno kraljestvo je v zadnjih letih med najbolj predanimi izboljšanju te dobre upravne in zakonodajne prakse.
The UK, in the last years, is one of the most dedicated to improve those good administrative and legislative practices.
Glej na primer „Vodnik o prenosu: učinkovit način za izvajanje evropskih direktiv“, ki ga je objavil kabinet, ali „Izgubljeno s prevodom.
See, for instance, the "Transposition guide: how to implement European directives effectively" published by the Cabinet Office of "Lost in Translation?
Odziv na izzive evropske zakonodaje“, ki ga je objavil državni urad za revizijo. .
Responding to challenges of European Law" published by the National Audit Office. .
Vendar mora poleg tega Komisija povečati raznolikost metod za zagotovitev hitrejših rešitev in preprečevanje kršitev.
However, the Commission also needs to diversify its methods with a view to ensuring speedier solutions and preventing infringements.
MINORJEVA je pojasnila potek vsakodnevne uporabe zakonodaje Skupnosti: „ Zanjo so odgovorni državni uradniki.
Mrs MINOR explained how the day-to-day application of Community law is done: " it lies in the hands of national officials.
V nekaterih primerih, kot je nadziranje zakonodaje o bančništvu in zavarovalništvu, je jasno določen osrednji organ, včasih celo posameznik s dokončno odgovornostjo.
In some cases, as in the supervision of banking and insurance legislation, there is a clearly identified central authority, even sometimes an individual, with whom the ultimate responsibility lies.
V drugih primerih, kot sta javno naročanje ali področje priznavanja diplom, pa veliko število državnih uslužbencev sprejema odločitve na nacionalni, regionalni, lokalni ravni in ravni posameznikov, zato Komisija te posamezne odločitve težko nadzoruje ali o njih presoja.
But in other cases, such as public procurement, or the field of recognition of diplomas, there are a myriad of national officials who take decisions at national, regional, local and individual level, and it is difficult for the Commission to supervise or audit those individual decisions.
Komisija se pri odločanju o morebitnih popravnih ukrepih opira na delovanje sistema ali celotnega sektorja “.
The Commission relies upon the functioning of the system or the sector as a whole in order to determine whether there is the need for corrective action" .
Komisija zdaj pridobiva takšne informacije na podlagi pritožb in peticij.
The Commission currently acquires such information through complaints and petitions.
Ta odnos je morda rahlo pasiven, saj se lahko Komisija zaradi pomanjkanja sredstev le pasivno opre na prejete informacije in pri tem največ pozornosti nameni vprašanjem, na katera opozarjajo peticije in pritožbe.
This is perhaps a slightly reactive attitude, inasmuch as the Commission, on account of its lack of resources, can only rely passively on the information it receives and in this regard it attaches the greatest priority to those issues which arrive by way of petitions and complaints.
18). se tudi mehanizem SOLVIT
The SOLVIT
SOLVIT deluje od julija 2002 in je spletno omrežje za reševanje težav, v katerem sodelujejo države članice EU za zunajsodno reševanje težav, ki se pojavljajo zaradi napačne uporabe prava EU s strani organov javne uprave na področju notranjega trga.
SOLVIT has been working since July 2002 and is an on-line problem solving network in which EU Member States work together to solve without legal proceedings problems caused by the misapplication of Internal Market law by public authorities.
Centri SOLVIT so v vseh državah članicah EU (in na Norveškem, v Islandiji in Lihtenštajnu) in pomagajo pri obravnavanju pritožb, ki jih vložijo državljani in podjetja.
There is a SOLVIT centre in every EU Member State (as well as in Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein) helping with handling complaints from both citizens and businesses.
So sestavni del državne uprave in si prizadevajo, da bi rešili težave v desetih tednih.
They are part of the national administration and are committed to providing solutions to problems within ten weeks.
Uporaba omrežja SOLVIT je brezplačna.
Using SOLVIT is free of charge.
Omrežje SOLVIT, ki ga upravljajo države članice, usklajuje Komisija, ki zagotavlja baze podatkov in lahko pomaga pospešiti reševanje težav.
The SOLVIT network, operated by the Member States, is coordinated by the Commission who provides database facilities and may help to speed up the resolution of problems.
Poleg tega Komisija pošlje uradne pritožbe, ki jih prejme, v omrežje SOLVIT, če je velika možnost, da bi se lahko težava odpravila brez sodnih postopkov.
The Commission also passes formal complaints it receives on to SOLVIT if there is a good chance that the problem could be solved without legal action.
Druga mesta zbiranja informacij vključujejo stalne tehnične ali komitološke odbore, ustanovljene z različnimi direktivami.
Other fora where the Commission gathers information include the standing technical or comitology committees set up under various Directives.
Svetovalni odbor o notranjem trgu na primer združuje uradnike iz držav članic s splošno pristojnostjo za notranji trg.
For example, there is an Internal Market Advisory Committee, which brings together officials from the Member States with an overall responsibility for the internal market.
Obstajajo tudi mreže zakonodajalcev in uradnikov ali skupin strokovnjakov, kot je nacionalna mreža za konkurenco na področju politike konkurence.
There are also networks of regulators and officials, or groups of experts, such as the national competition network in the field of competition policy.
V sektorju finančnih storitev se Lamfalussyjev pristop uporablja kot dodatno sredstvo, ki pomaga zagotoviti učinkovito in usklajeno izvajanje zakonodaje EU v državah članicah.
In the financial services sector, the Lamfalussy approach serves as an additional means to help ensure effective and convergent implementation of EU legislation across Member States.
Na stopnji 3 vključuje povezovanje zakonodajalcev v mrežo, ki omogoča pripravo skupnih razlagalnih priporočil, skladnih smernic in enotnih standardov, medsebojne preglede ter primerjave med regulativnimi sistemi, da se spodbujata skladno izvajanje in uporaba.
At level 3, it includes networking between regulators with a view to producing joint interpretative recommendations, consistent guidelines and common standards, peer reviews and comparisons between regulatory practice to foster consistent implementation and application.
Kot je povedala MINORJEVA, „ zakonodajalci in nadzorniki ... sodelujejo pri vsakodnevni uporabi zakonodaje Skupnosti.
As Mrs MINOR put it, " regulators and supervisors ... cooperate in the day-to-day application of Community legislation.
Zakonodajalci imajo po prenosu ukrepov in njihovi vsakodnevni uporabi redne sestanke
Once the measures have been transposed and being applied on a daily basis, there are regular meetings of regulators
Glej obrazložitve o odboru CEIOPS v delu IV. “ .
see explanations on CEIOPS in Part IV. " .
Komisija je večkrat izjavila, da ne more sistematično prevzeti vloge nadzornika nacionalnih organov ali posameznih subjektov.
The Commission has repeatedly stated that it cannot assume the role of supervising national authorities or individual entities on a systematic basis.
Trdi tudi, da glede na osebje, ki ga ima zdaj na voljo, ni mogoče, da bi skupine uradnikov iskale primere nepravilne uporabe v 27 državah članicah.
The Commission claims that, with the current staff resources at its disposal, it is not feasible to send out teams of officials in search of cases of incorrect application throughout the 27 Member States.
Inšpektorji opravljajo preglede na kraju samem le v nekaterih posebnih sektorjih, kot sta ribištvo in zdravje ljudi.
Only in certain special sectors, such as fisheries and human health, do inspectors carry out on-the-spot checks.
Na večini drugih področij pa Komisija poskuša spodbujati zakonodajalce in nadzornike držav članic k tesnejšemu sodelovanju z opravljanjem medsebojnih pregledov, sprejemanjem protokolov ali memorandumov o soglasju za usklajeno uporabo posamičnih direktiv in splošnim izvajanjem politike nadzorne konvergence.
For most other areas, the Commission tries instead to encourage Member States' regulators and supervisors to work more closely together by carrying out peer reviews, adopting Protocols or Memorandums of Understanding for the coordinated application of specific directives and generally pursuing a policy of supervisory convergence.
Obstaja upanje, da se bodo težave z nepravilno uporabo zakonodaje Skupnosti odkrile prej.
The hope is that problems of incorrect application of Community legislation will be detected at an earlier stage.
Zapisnik H10, DURANDOVA, stran 7, odst 7.
H10 Verbatim, Mrs. DURAND, page 7, par.7.
AYRAL (H10) je v zvezi s splošno usklajenostjo uporabe zakonodaje ES povedal, da „ nous n'avons pas le pouvoir d'intervention auprès des États membres pour nous assurer qu'ils respectent, qu'ils appliquent la législation de la même manière.
On the overall consistency of EC law application, Mr. AYRAL (H10) stated that " nous n'avons pas le pouvoir d'intervention auprès des États membres pour nous assurer qu'ils respectent, qu'ils appliquent la législation de la même manière.
Neustrezno izvajanje zakonodaje Skupnosti – postopek za ugotavljanje kršitev
Failures to implement Community law - the infringement procedure
Komisija začne postopek za ugotavljanje kršitev v skladu s členom 226 Pogodbe o ES kot odziv na pritožbo pritožnika v državi članici ali na lastno pobudo (informacije, pridobljene na primer iz tiska, vprašanj Evropskega parlamenta itd.).
The Commission initiates the infringement proceedings in accordance with Article 226 TEC either in response to a complaint from a complainant within the Member State or on its own initiative (information gained for example through the press, European Parliament questions, etc.).
VOGENAUER je opisal postopek v praksi: „ Potencialne kršitve se zabeležijo v register.
Mr VOGENAUER described the procedure followed in practice: " They do record potential infringement in a register.
Države članice nato prejmejo zahteve za nadaljnje pojasnitve pri pogajanjih.
They then turn to the Member States to request further clarifications in negotiations.
Šele potem se začne uraden postopek za ugotavljanje kršitev, države članice prejmejo uradni opomin, običajno pa se določi tudi rok za odgovor.
Only then the official infringement procedure starts, they send a letter of formal notice to the Member State , usually give a deadline for a reply.
Po poteku tega roka Komisija še enkrat izda obrazloženo mnenje z rokom in šele če ga država članica ne upošteva, se celotna zadeva predloži Sodišču Evropskih skupnosti.
After expiry of that deadline, the Commission issues a reasoned opinion again with a deadline and if the Member State has not complied only then is the whole issue referred to the ECJ.
Komisije ne zavezuje nobena zakonska obveznost v zvezi s tem in ima na tem področju široko diskrecijsko pravico. “
The Commission is under no legal obligation to do so, it enjoys very wide discretion. "
Vendar je VOGENAUER poudaril, da „ je s tem postopkom precej težav.
However, Mr VOGENAUER pointed out that " there are quite a few problems with this procedure.
Prvič, deluje šele, ko je škoda že povzročena.
First, it only works once the damage has been caused.
Država članica mora že kršiti svoje obveznosti.
The Member State has got to be in violation of its obligations already.
Največja težava je, da niso določeni roki, o katerih se ni mogoče pogajati, zato je celoten postopek zelo zamuden.
The biggest problem is that there are no fixed non-negotiable deadlines, so the whole procedure is very cumbersome.
Od vpisa pritožbe v evidenco do morebitne predložitve sodiščem povprečno poteče ...
It takes on average ...
45 mesecev.
45 months between the registration of a complaint and an eventual referral to the courts.
Država članica lahko krši svoje obveznosti več kot 4 leta, preden se celotna zadeva predloži sodiščem.
A Member State can be in breach of its obligations for more than 4 years before the whole issue is referred to the courts.
Dejansko lahko nekatere države članice to uporabijo v svojo korist in s tem pridobijo čas, če se odzovejo tik pred potekom končnega roka, pa ostanejo brez vsake kazni.
In fact, some Member States can use that to their advantage and play for time and if they just reply before the expiry of the final deadline, they will go on completely without sanction.
Druga težava je diskrecijska pravica Evropske komisije.
Another problem is the discretion of the European Commission.
Svet, Evropski parlament in posamezniki ne morejo začeti teh postopkov.
Neither the Council or the European Parliament nor an individual can bring these proceedings.
Lahko le poročajo Komisiji ali Evropskemu parlamentu ali pri njiju vložijo pritožbo.“
They can only report or lodge a complaint with the Commission or the European Parliament."
Komisija je poudarila, da se je postopek za ugotavljanje kršitev razvijal postopoma, Komisija pa zopet meni, da njegovo uspešnost povečujeta dva dodatna instrumenta:
The Commission pointed out that the infringement procedure has evolved over time and, again according to the Commission, two additional instruments enhance its performance today:
Prvič, v členu 228 je novejša določba, v skladu s katero je Sodišče Evropskih skupnosti pristojno, da določi denarno kazen, če države članice daljše obdobje ne izvršijo sodbe v skladu s členom 226 – „ en cas de non-respect de l'arrêt de la Cour, la Commission peut saisir une deuxième fois et la Cour peut imposer une astreinte financière pour contraindre l'État membre à exécuter son premier arrêt (article 228 TEC). ...
Firstly, there is the more recent provision of Article 228, which gives the ECJ jurisdiction to impose a pecuniary penalty if there is a persistent failure on the part of a Member States to comply with a judgement under Article 226 - " en cas de non-respect de l'arrêt de la Cour, la Commission peut saisir une deuxième fois et la Cour peut imposer une astreinte financière pour contraindre l'État membre à exécuter son premier arrêt (article 228 TEC). ...
Viri Komisije navajajo (H10), da je bilo do zdaj v skladu s členom 228 Pogodbe o ES obravnavanih 39 zadev (4 % postopkov za ugotavljanje kršitev), Sodišče Evropskih skupnosti pa je le za 4 zadeve učinkovito naložilo denarno kazen zadevni državi članici (zapisnik, stran 14, odst.
According to Commission sources (H10), 39 cases have so far been pursued under Article228 TEC (4% of infringement procedures), and only in 4 cases the ECJ has effectively imposed a financial sanction on the Member State concerned (Verbatim, page 14, par.9). .
Od leta 1993 so bile v zvezi s tem posebnim postopkom izrečene le tri sodbe .“
Only 3 judgements have been given since 1993 on this specific procedure ."
Drugič, DURANDOVA je ugotovila, da „ dans quelques cas, la Commission a soumis à la Cour des affaires en urgence et elle a demandé à la Cour d'imposer la suspension de la mesure litigieuse.
Secondly, as pointed out by Mrs DURAND " dans quelques cas, la Commission a soumis à la Cour des affaires en urgence et elle a demandé à la Cour d'imposer la suspension de la mesure litigieuse.
DURANDOVA je v zvezi z vprašanjem uporabe kazni na kraju samem zaradi napačne uporabe zakonodaje EU menila, da „ jusqu'à présent, on a plutôt un système où les droits de la défense doivent pouvoir s'exercer et, par conséquent, l'imposition immédiate de pénalités me semble difficilement envisageable.
Considering the issue of applying 'on-the-spot' fines for mis-application of EC legislation, Mrs DURAND took the view that " jusqu'à présent, on a plutôt un système où les droits de la défense doivent pouvoir s'exercer et, par conséquent, l'imposition immédiate de pénalités me semble difficilement envisageable.
DURANDOVA je zaključila, da „ les méthodes mises en place pour assurer le contrôle de l'application du droit communautaire se sont diversifiées dans le but d'obtenir une mise en conformité plus rapide ...
Mrs DURAND concluded that "les méthodes mises en place pour assurer le contrôle de l'application du droit communautaire se sont diversifiées dans le but d'obtenir une mise en conformité plus rapide...
DURANDOVA je povedala, da „ Komisija vsako leto odkrije približno 1 000 do 1 500 primerov nepravilne uporabe zakonodaje Skupnosti, ki vključujejo nepravilno uporabo Pogodbe ali nepravilno uporabo direktiv.
Mrs DURAND stated that " the Commission detects approximately 1,000 to 1,500 cases a year of incorrect application of the Community law, whether it is incorrect application of the Treaty or of incorrect application of the directives.
Pritožbe državljanov in podjetij so glaven vir informacij za odkrivanje primerov nepravilne uporabe “.
Citizens' and companies' complaints are the primary source of information to detect cases of incorrect application ".
Delež primerov, ki jih je Komisija začela samodejno, se povečuje in zajema skoraj polovico primerov nepravilne uporabe.
The proportion of the cases opened automatically by the Commission is on the increase and represents almost half cases of incorrect application.
Zdaj se obravnava okrog 3 500 primerov.
Around 3,500 cases are currently pending.
Približno 40 % teh primerov je rešenih po uradnem opominu, približno 40 % primerov pa se zaključi na stopnji obrazloženega mnenja.
Approximately 40% of them are settled after the letter of formal notice and approximately 40% more of the cases are closed at the reasoned opinion stage.
Komisija vloži pri Sodišču Evropskih skupnosti vsako leto približno 170 zadev, tj. približno 10 %.
The Commission brings approximately 170 cases a year before the ECJ, i.e. approximately 10%.
Odbor je prepričan, da je Komisija spremljala izvajanje tretje direktive o življenjskem zavarovanju v skladu s takrat prevladujočo filozofijo
It is apparent to the committee that the Commission carried out its monitoring of the implementation of the 3LD in line with the philosophy prevailing at the time
Ukrepi Komisije za spremljanje izvajanja tretje direktive o življenjskem zavarovanju so izčrpno obravnavani v oddelku II.2 dela II tega poročila. .
The Commission's actions with regard to monitoring the implementation of the Third Life Directive are dealt with exhaustively in section II.2 of Part II of this report. .
Zato je zgolj preverila formalen pravni prenos določb tretje direktive o življenjskem zavarovanju v zakonodajo Združenega kraljestva.
Thus, it merely checked the formal legal transposition of the 3LD's provisions into UK law.
Vendar kakovost nacionalne zakonodaje za prenos tretje direktive o življenjskem zavarovanju ni bila ocenjena.
However, there was no evaluation of the quality of the national legislation transposing the 3LD.
Najpomembnejše pa je, da se niso spremljale nadaljnje stopnje postopka izvajanja, tj. praktična uporaba tretje direktive o življenjskem zavarovanju s strani nacionalnih organov.
Moreover and most importantly, there was no monitoring of the subsequent stages in the implementation process, i.e. the practical application of the 3LD by national authorities.
Dejstvo, da niso bile predložene pritožbe posameznikov, ne sme biti izgovor za to, da se uporaba ni spremljala.
The absence of complaints from individuals is no excuse for the lack of monitoring of application.
Na pasiven odnos Komisije vsekakor kaže dejstvo, da Komisija ni vedela za težave do začetka leta 2001, ko so poslanci parlamenta začeli vzpostavljati stik z institucijo v imenu svojih volivcev, ki so bili zavarovanci družbe ELAS.
Indeed, the Commission's passive attitude is illustrated by the fact that it did not become aware of the problems until early 2001, when Members of this Parliament began to contact the institution on behalf of their constituents who were ELAS policyholders.
Odboru se zdi očitno, da je potreben dejavnejši in morda celo naključen pregled ključnih direktiv.
It is also apparent to the committee that there needs to be a more active oversight, even in a random fashion, of key directives.
To nujno vključuje natančno preverjanje nacionalnih dogodkov s strani Komisije.
This necessarily implies close scrutiny of national events by the Commission.
Pomanjkanje preverjanja se lahko opredeli kot sistematična pomanjkljivost v instituciji.
This lack of scrutiny can be identified as a systematic weakness encountered within the institution.
Pasivna vloga Komisije pri spremljanju uporabe tretje direktive o življenjskem zavarovanju ni le posledica posebne filozofije, ki je prevelik pomen pripisala pripravi zakonodaje in manj zagotavljanju njenega izvajanja, ampak do neke mere tudi pomanjkanja sredstev, ki jih je Komisija namenila temu področju.
The passive role played by the Commission in relation to monitoring the application of the 3LD is not only a corollary of a certain philosophy which placed too much importance in producing legislation and less in ensuring its implementation but is moreover a consequence, to a certain extent, of a lack of resources that the devoted to this area by the Commission.
Pomanjkanje sredstev je še vedno težava tudi pri spremljanju prenosa (zlasti jezikovno znanje, ker prejeta izvedbena zakonodaja ni niti prevedena).
Lack of resources also continues to be a problem in the monitoring of transposition (especially linguistic capacities, as the implementing legislation received is not even translated).
V primeru tretje direktive o življenjskem zavarovanju je bilo treba zaradi pomanjkanja sredstev skleniti pogodbo z zunanjimi strokovnjaki, ki so pripravili nepopolno in nekakovostno študijo, kot je navedeno v delu II tega poročila.
In case of the Third Life Directive, the lack of resources made it necessary to contract external consultants, who produced an incomplete study of poor quality, as is shown in Part II of this report.
Vendar je treba poudariti, da Komisija dela zunanjih strokovnjakov ni nadzirala tako, da bi se zagotovila zadovoljiva analiza prenosa tretje direktive o življenjskem zavarovanju s strani držav članic.
It must be stressed, however, that the Commission failed to supervise the work of the external consultants in a way that would have ensured a satisfactory analysis of the Member States' transposition of the Third life Directive.
Kaže, da je obstajalo soglasje o potrebi, da vse evropske institucije resneje obravnavajo vprašanje spremljanja izvajanja
There seems to be a consensus of opinion on the need for all European institutions to give more serious consideration to the question of monitoring implementation
Glej zlasti resolucijo Evropskega parlamenta o spremljanju uporabe zakonodaje Skupnosti (2003–2004) in resolucijo Evropskega parlamenta o izvajanju, posledicah in vplivu veljavne zakonodaje notranjega trga, ki sta bili sprejeti 16. maja 2006.
See specially European Parliament Resolution on Monitoring the application of Community Law ( 2003-2004) and EP Resolution on the implementation, consequences and impact of the internal market legislation in force, both adopted on 16 May 2006.
Glej tudi 21. in 22. letno poročilo Komisije ( KOM(2004)0839 in KOM(2005)0570 ). v zvezi s prenosom in uporabo.
See also the European Commission's 21st and 22nd annual reports ( COM(2004)0839 and COM(2005)0570 ). , both in terms of transposition as well as application.
Pravilna uporaba zakonodaje Skupnosti je osrednji element institucionalnega sistema EU.
The correct application of the Community law is a central element of the EU's institutional system.
To je osnovni pogoj za učinkovitost evropskih predpisov in spoštovanje enakopravnosti med državami članicami.
It is a prerequisite for the effectiveness of European regulations and of the respect of equality between the Member States.
Poleg tega zagotavlja, da lahko podjetja, stranke in državljani uveljavljajo svoje pravice, ki izhajajo iz evropske zakonodaje, na hiter in učinkovit način.
Moreover, it guarantees that companies, consumers and citizens can exercise the rights that they derive from European law in a rapid and effective way.