natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Države članice lahko imenujejo nepravosodne organe kot pristojne organe za odločanje pod pogojem, da so ti organi pristojni za sprejemanje podobnih odločitev v skladu s svojim nacionalnim pravom in postopki. države izdajateljice na zahtevo zaščitene osebe.
Member States may designate non-judicial authorities as competent authorities, provided that such authorities have the competence to take decisions of a similar nature under their national law and procedures. of the issuing State at the request of the protected person.
(Zaščitena oseba lahko zahtevek poda pristojnemu organu države izvršiteljice, vendar bo moral ta organ zahtevo nato posredovati pristojnemu organu države izdajateljice.)
(The protected person may make the request to the competent authority of the executing State, but that authority will then have to forward the request to the competent authority of the issuing State.)
Organi, ki sprejemajo zaščitne ukrepe v smislu te direktive, so dolžni obveščati zaščiteno osebo o razpoložljivosti evropske odredbe o zaščiti, če bi se oseba nameravala preseliti v drugo državo članico.
Authorities adopting a protection measure within the meaning of the directive are under a duty to inform the protected person about the availability of an EPO should that person intend to move to another Member State.
Prav tako morajo osebi svetovati, naj pred selitvijo zaprosi za evropsko odredbo o zaščiti.
They are also under a duty to advise that person to apply for an EPO before they go.
Oblika evropske odredbe o zaščiti
Form of the EPO
Standardni obrazec je v prilogi predlagane direktive.
A standard form is annexed to the proposed directive.
Vsebovati mora podatke o identiteti in državljanstvu zaščitene osebe
It has to contain information as to the identity and nationality of the protected person
Ter podatke o zakonitem zastopniku osebe, če je ta mladoletna ali nima pravne sposobnosti. ; podatke o uporabi morebitnih tehničnih pripomočkov, ki so bili dani zaščiteni osebi; podatke o pristojnem organu države izdajateljice; opredelitev zaščitnega ukrepa, na podlagi katerega je bila izdana evropska odredba o zaščiti; povzetek dejstev in okoliščin, ki so pripeljale do uvedbe zaščitnega ukrepa; obveznosti ali prepovedi, ki jih uvaja zaščitni ukrep, dolžino in izrecno navedbo, da kršitev predstavlja kaznivo dejanje po zakonodaji države izdajateljice ali se lahko kaznuje z odvzemom prostosti; identiteto povzročitelja nevarnosti; vse druge okoliščine, ki lahko vplivajo na oceno nevarnosti in po potrebi izrecno navedbo, da je bila sodba iz člena 2 Okvirnega sklepa Sveta 2008/947/PNZ ali odločba o nadzornih ukrepih iz člena 4 Okvirnega sklepa Sveta 2009/829/PNZ, že posredovana drugi državi članici, in določitev pristojnega organa za izvršbo take sodbe ali odločbe.
And of that person’s legal representative if the protected person is a minor or lacks legal capacity. ; the use of any technological instruments provided to the protected person; particulars of the competent authority of the issuing State; the identification of the protection measure on the basis of which the EPO is adopted; a summary of the facts and circumstances which led to the imposition of the protection measure; the obligations or prohibitions imposed by the protection measure, their length and the express indication that their infringement constitutes a criminal offence under the law of the issuing State or may otherwise be punishable by a deprivation of liberty; the identification of the person causing a danger; any other circumstances that could have an influence on the assessment of the danger, and, where appropriate, the express indication that a judgment, as defined by Article 2 of Council Framework Decision 2008/947/JHA, or a decision on supervision measures, as defined by Article 4 of Council Framework Decision 2009/829/JHA, has already been transferred to another Member State and the identification of the competent authority for the enforcement of such a judgment or decision.
Ali mora država izvršiteljica priznati evropsko odredbo o zaščiti?
Does the executing State have to recognise an EPO?
Vendar lahko država članica v skladu s členom 9 utemeljeno zavrne priznavanje evropske odredbe o zaščiti.
However, under Article 9, a Member State may give a reasoned refusal to recognise an EPO.
Dovoljeni razlogi za zavrnitev so:
The permitted grounds for refusal are:
(a) evropska odredba o zaščiti ni popolna ali ni bila izpolnjena v roku, ki ga je določil pristojni organ države izvršiteljice;
(a) the EPO is not complete or has not been completed within the time-limit set by the competent authority of the executing State;
(b) zahteve iz člena 2(2)
(b) the requirements set out in Article 2(2)
Glej zgoraj. niso izpolnjene;
See above. have not been met;
(c) zaščita izhaja iz izvršbe kazni ali ukrepa, za katero velja amnestija v skladu s pravom države izvršiteljice in se nanaša na dejanje, ki v skladu s tem pravom sodi v njeno pristojnost;
(c) the protection derives from the execution of a penalty or measure that is covered by amnesty according to the law of the executing State and relates to an act which falls within its competence according to that law;
(d) po pravu države izvršiteljice je povzročitelju nevarnosti podeljena imuniteta, kar onemogoča sprejem zaščitnih ukrepov.
(d) there is immunity conferred under the law of the executing State on the person causing danger, which makes it impossible to adopt the protection measures.
Kaj se zgodi v državi izvršiteljici?
What happens in the executing State?
V skladu s členom 8 predlagane direktive mora pristojni organ države izvršiteljice:
Under Article 8 of the proposed directive, the competent authority in the executing State has to
(a) priznati evropsko odredbo o zaščiti in sprejeti vse ukrepe, ki bi bili na voljo po njegovi nacionalni zakonodaji v podobnem primeru, da se zagotovi varstvo zaščitene osebe (razen če odloči, da bo uveljavljal enega od razlogov za nepriznanje);
(a) recognise the EPO and take all measures that would be available under its national law in a similar case in order to ensure the protection of the protected person (unless it decides to invoke one of the grounds for non-recognition);
(b) obvestiti povzročitelja nevarnosti o vseh ukrepih, ki jih sprejeme;
(b) inform the person causing danger of any measure which it takes;
(c) sprejeti morebiten nujen in začasni ukrep, potreben za zagotovitev nadaljnje zaščite zaščitene osebe; ter
(c) take any urgent and provisional measure needed in order to ensure the continued protection of the protected person; and
(d) nemudoma obvestiti pristojni organ v državi izdajateljici o vsaki kršitvi zaščitnega ukrepa, ki je temelj evropske odredbe o zaščiti (s standardnim obrazcem).
(d) immediately notify the competent authority of the issuing State of any breach of the protection measure underlying the EPO (using a standard form).
Pristojni organ v državi izvršiteljici mora obvestiti pristojni organ v državi izdajateljici in zaščiteno osebo o ukrepih, ki jih sprejme.
The competent authority of the executing State has to inform the competent authority of the issuing State and the protected person about the measures which it adopts.
Ukrepi po sprejetju evropske odredbe o zaščiti
Action subsequent to the issue of an EPO
Zgolj država izdajateljica lahko zaščitni ukrep obnovi, pregleda, umakne ali spremeni, izda nalog za prijetje itd. ali začne nov kazenski postopek proti povzročitelju nevarnosti v skladu s svojo zakonodajo (člen 10).
Only the issuing State may renew, review, withdraw or modify the protection measure, issue an arrest warrant, etc. or initiate any new criminal proceedings against the person causing the danger, which it is to do under its law (Article 10).
Država izvršiteljica lahko prekliče priznanje evropske odredbe o zaščiti, zgolj če obstajajo dokazi, da je zaščitena oseba zagotovo zapustila njeno ozemlje (člen 11).
The executing State may revoke the recognition of an EPO only where there is evidence that the protected person has definitively left its territory (Article 11).
Za odločitve, ki jih v skladu s to direktivo sprejme pristojni organ države izvršiteljice, se uporablja nacionalno pravo te države (člen 13).
Decisions made by the competent authority of the executing State under the directive are to be governed by its national law (Article 13).
Glede na naravo predlagane evropske odredbe o zaščiti, ki izhaja iz zgornje analize, je popolnoma ustrezno, da pravni podlagi iz člena 82(1)(d), katere cilj je lažje sodelovanje med sodnimi ali drugimi enakovrednimi organi držav članic pri kazenskih postopkih in izvrševanju odločb, doda člen 82(1)(a), ki določa pravila in postopke za zagotovitev priznavanja vseh oblik sodb in sodnih odločb.
Given the nature of the proposed European Protection Order as it appears from the foregoing analysis, it is entirely appropriate to add to the legal basis of Article 82(1)(d), which aims at facilitating cooperation between national judicial or equivalent authorities in relation to criminal proceedings and the enforcement of decisions, Article 82(1)(a), which deals with rules and procedures for ensuring "recognition of all forms of judgments and judicial decisions".
Posledično menimo, da člen 82(1)(d) PDEU lahko služi kot pravna podlaga za osnutek direktive, vendar je primerno, da bi imela pobuda potrebno težo kot instrument priznavanja sodnih odločb, navesti tudi člen 82(1)(a) PDEU.
Consequently, it is considered that Article 82(1)(d) TFEU can be relied upon as legal basis for the draft Directive, but that in order to give the initiative its due weight as an instrument of recognition of judicial decisions, it would be appropriate to refer also to Article 82(1)(a) TFEU.
Odbor je zadevo obravnaval na seji 28. oktobra 2010.
The committee considered the above question at its meeting of 28 October 2010.
Odbor za pravne zadeve je po obravnavi na seji 28. oktobra 2010 soglasno
At its meeting of 28 October 2010 the Committee on Legal Affairs accordingly decided, unanimously
Pri končnem glasovanju so bili navzoči: Raffaele Baldassarre (predsedujoči), Sebastian Valentin Bodu (podpredsednik), Eva Lichtenberger (poročevalka), Françoise Castex, Marielle Gallo, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Daniel Hannan, Kurt Lechner, Bernhard Rapkay, Diana Wallis, Cecilia Wikström in Tadeusz Zwiefka. sprejel odločitev, da vam priporoči naslednje: predlagana direktiva naj se sprejme na podlagi člena 82(1)(a) in (d) PDEU.
The following were present for the final vote: Raffaele Baldassarre (acting Chair), Sebastian Valentin Bodu (Vice-Chair), Eva Lichtenberger (rapporteur), Françoise Castex, Marielle Gallo, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Daniel Hannan, Kurt Lechner, Bernhard Rapkay, Diana Wallis, Cecilia Wikström and Tadeusz Zwiefka , to recommend you as follows: the proposed Directive should be adopted on the basis of Article 82(1)(a) and (d) TFEU.
LIBE-FEMM (skupna seja odborov - član 51)
LIBE-FEMM (Joint Committee meetings - Rule 51)
o predlogu uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o določitvi splošnih pravil in načel, na podlagi katerih države članice nadzirajo izvajanje izvedbenih pooblastil Komisije
on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers
MNENJE Odbora za razvoj ...........................................................................................31
OPINION of the Committee on Development ......................................................33
MNENJE Odbora za mednarodno trgovino ........................................................45
OPINION of the Committee on International Trade ......................................47
MNENJE Odbora za ekonomske in monetarne zadeve ..................................56
OPINION of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs ............58
MNENJE Odbora za okolje, javno zdravje in varnost hrane ...................66
OPINION of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety 70
MNENJE Odbora za notranji trg in varstvo potrošnikov .........................73
OPINION of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection 77
MNENJE Odbora za promet in turizem ...................................................................84
OPINION of the Committee on Transport and Tourism ................................89
MNENJE Odbora za regionalni razvoj ..................................................................90
OPINION of the Committee on Regional Development ..................................95
MNENJE Odbora za kmetijstvo in razvoj podeželja .....................................100
OPINION of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development .105
MNENJE Odbora za ribištvo ......................................................................................112
OPINION of the Committee on Fisheries ..............................................................117
MNENJE Odbora za državljanske svoboščine, pravosodje in notranje zadeve 121
OPINION of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs 127
MNENJE Odbora za ustavne zadeve ......................................................................125
OPINION of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs ..............................131
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu ( KOM(2010)0083 ),
– having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council ( COM(2010)0083 ),
– ob upoštevanju člena 294(2) in člena 291(3) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije, na podlagi katerih je Komisija Parlamentu podala predlog ( C7-0073/2010 ),
– having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 291(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament ( C7-0073/2010 ),
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za pravne zadeve in mnenj Odbora za zunanje zadeve, Odbora za razvoj, Odbora za mednarodno trgovino, Odbora za ekonomske in monetarne zadeve, Odbora za okolje, javno zdravje in varnost hrane, Odbora za notranji trg in varstvo potrošnikov, Odbora za promet in turizem, Odbora za regionalni razvoj, Odbora za kmetijstvo in razvoj podeželja, Odbora za ribištvo, Odbora za državljanske svoboščine, pravosodje in notranje zadeve in Odbora za ustavne zadeve ( A7–0355/2010 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Development, the Committee on International Trade, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, the Committee on Transport and Tourism, the Committee on Regional Development, the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, the Committee on Fisheries, the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the Committee on Constitutional Affairs ( A7‑0355/2010 ),
2 poziva Komisijo, naj zadevo ponovno predloži Parlamentu, če namerava svoj predlog bistveno spremeniti ali nadomestiti z drugim besedilom;
2 Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;
(1a) Zakonodajalec ob doslednem upoštevanju meril iz Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije v vsakem temeljnem aktu odloči o podelitvi izvedbenih pooblastil Komisiji, v skladu s členom 291(2) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije.
(1a) It is for the legislator, in full respect of the criteria laid down in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, to decide in each basic act to confer implementing powers on the Commission in accordance with Article 291(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
(5a) Nadzorni mehanizem bi moral, kjer je to primerno, vključevati predložitev zadeve odboru za pritožbe, ki bi se moral sestati na ustrezni ravni.
(5a) Where appropriate, the control mechanism should include referral to an appeal committee which should meet at the appropriate level.
(8) Določiti bi bilo treba merila, ki bi opredeljevala postopek za sprejemanje izvedbenih aktov.
(8) Criteria should be laid down to determine the procedure to be used for the adoption of implementing acts.
Zaradi zagotavljanja večje usklajenosti in sorazmernosti postopkovnih zahtev z naravo izvedbenih aktov, ki jih je treba sprejeti, bi morala biti ta merila zavezujoča .
In order to achieve greater consistency and in order to ensure that procedural requirements are proportionate to the nature of the implementing acts to be adopted , those criteria should be binding .
Zaradi zagotavljanja večje usklajenosti bi morale biti postopkovne zahteve sorazmerne z naravo in učinkom izvedbenih aktov, ki jih je treba sprejeti.
In order to achieve greater consistency , the procedural requirements should be proportionate to the nature and impact of the implementing acts to be adopted.
(9) Postopek pregleda bi bilo treba uporabljati samo za sprejemanje ukrepov, ki se splošno uporabljajo in so zasnovani za izvajanje temeljnih aktov, ter posebnih ukrepov, ki bi lahko imeli znaten učinek.
(9) The examination procedure should only apply for the adoption of measures of general scope designed to implement basic acts and specific measures with a potentially important impact.
V skladu z navedenim postopkom bi morale države članice izvajati nadzor, in sicer tako, da ukrepov ne bi bilo mogoče sprejeti, če ne bi bili v skladu z mnenjem odbora, razen v zelo izjemnih okoliščinah, ko bi morala Komisija imeti možnost, da ukrepe kljub negativnemu mnenju odbora sprejme in jih uporablja za določen čas.
That procedure should provide for the control of the Member States in such a way that measures cannot be adopted if they are not in conformity with the opinion of the committee, except in very exceptional circumstances, where the Commission should be able, in spite of a negative opinion, to adopt and apply measures for a limited period of time.
Če odbor ne da mnenja, bi morala Komisija imeti možnost ponovne proučitve, pri čemer bi upoštevala stališča, izražena v okviru odbora.
The Commission should be able to review the draft measures in the event that no opinion is delivered by the committee, taking into account the views expressed within the committee.
(9) Postopek pregleda bi bilo treba uporabljati zlasti za sprejemanje ukrepov, ki se splošno uporabljajo in so zasnovani za izvajanje temeljnih aktov, ter posebnih ukrepov, ki bi lahko imeli znaten učinek.
(9) The examination procedure should in particular apply for the adoption of measures of general scope designed to implement basic acts and specific measures with a potentially important impact.
V skladu z navedenim postopkom bi morale države članice izvajati nadzor, in sicer tako, da aktov ne bi bilo mogoče sprejeti, če ne bi bili v skladu z mnenjem odbora, razen v zelo izjemnih okoliščinah, ko bi morala Komisija imeti možnost, da akte kljub negativnemu mnenju odbora sprejme in jih uporablja za določen čas.
That procedure should provide for the control of the Member States in such a way that acts cannot be adopted if they are not in conformity with the opinion of the committee, except in very exceptional circumstances, where the Commission should be able, in spite of a negative opinion, to adopt and apply acts for a limited period of time.
Če odbor ne da mnenja, bi morala Komisija imeti možnost ponovne proučitve, pri čemer bi upoštevala stališča, izražena v okviru odbora.
The Commission should be able to review the draft acts in the event that no opinion is delivered by the committee, taking into account the views expressed within the committee.
(Opomba: besedilo bi bilo treba v celoti spremeniti, da se bo upošteval izraz „izvedbeni akti”.)
(note: the text should be adapted throughout to the expression "implementing acts" .)
(9a) Kadar se s temeljim aktom Komisiji podelijo izvedbena pooblastila v zvezi s programi, ki imajo velike proračunske posledice ali so namenjeni tretjim državam, bi se moral uporabljati postopek pregleda.
(9a) Provided that the basic act confers implementing powers on the Commission relating to programmes with substantial budgetary implications or directed to third countries, the examination procedure should apply.
(9b) Predsednik pristojnega odbora bi si moral prizadevati za iskanje rešitev, ki bi bile deležne največje možne podpore v odboru ali odboru za pritožbe, in bi moral pojasniti, na kakšen način so se upoštevali razprave in predlogi o spremembah.
(9b) The Chair of the relevant committee should endeavour to find solutions which command the widest possible support within the committee or the appeal committee and should explain in which manner the discussions and suggestions for amendments have been taken into account.
S tem namenom bi morala Komisija posebno pozornost nameniti stališčem, ki so v odboru ali v odboru za pritožbe izražena v zvezi z osnutki dokončnih protidampinških in izravnalnih ukrepov.
For that purpose the Commission should pay particular attention to the views expressed within the committee or the appeal committee as regards draft definitive anti-dumping or countervailing measures.
(9c) Za uravnotežene rešitve Komisija pri razmišljanju o sprejetju drugih osnutkov izvedbenih aktov na posebej občutljivih področjih, kot so davki, zdravje potrošnikov, varnost hrane in zaščita okolja, v največji možni meri deluje tako, da ne nasprotuje prevladujočemu stališču, ki se morda v odboru za pritožbe pojavi v zvezi z ustreznostjo določenega izvedbenega akta.
(9c) When considering the adoption of other draft implementing acts concerning particularly sensitive sectors, notably taxation, consumers’ health, food safety and protection of the environment, the Commission, in order to find a balanced solution, will as far as possible act in such a way as to avoid going against any predominant position which might emerge within the appeal committee against the appropriateness of an implementing act.
(10) Svetovalni postopek bi bilo treba uporabiti v vseh drugih primerih in če se ta postopek šteje za najustreznejšega.
(10) The advisory procedure should apply in all other cases and where it is considered to be most appropriate.
(10) Svetovalni postopek bi bilo treba kot splošno pravilo uporabiti v vseh drugih primerih in če se ta postopek šteje za najustreznejšega.
(10) The advisory procedure should as a general rule apply in all other cases and where it is considered to be most appropriate.
(12) Evropski parlament in Svet bi bilo treba redno obveščati o postopkih v odborih.
(12) The European Parliament and the Council should be kept informed of committee proceedings on a regular basis.
(12) Evropski parlament in Svet bi bilo treba takoj obveščati o postopkih v odborih.
(12) The European Parliament and the Council should be promptly informed of committee proceedings on a regular basis.
(12a) Evropski parlament ali Svet bi morala imeti možnost kadar koli obvestiti Komisijo, da po njunem mnenju osnutek izvedbenega akta presega izvedbena pooblastila, določena v temeljnem aktu, ob upoštevanju njunih pravic v zvezi s pregledom zakonitosti aktov Unije.
(12a) The European Parliament or the Council should be able at any time to indicate to the Commission that they consider a draft implementing act to exceed the implementing powers provided for in the basic act, taking into account their rights relating to the review of the legality of Union acts.
(13) Zagotoviti bi bilo treba dostop javnosti do informacij o postopkih v odborih.
(13) Public access to information on committee proceedings should be ensured.
(13) Zagotoviti bi bilo treba dostop javnosti do informacij o postopkih v odborih v skladu z Uredbo (ES) št. 1049/2001 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 30. maja 2001 o dostopu javnosti do dokumentov Evropskega parlamenta, Sveta in Komisije¹.
(13) Public access to information on committee proceedings should be ensured in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents 1 .
(13a) Komisija bi morala vzdrževati register z informacijami o postopkih v odborih.
(13a) A register containing information on committee proceedings should be kept by the Commission.