natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Predlog je namenjen spodbujanju uporabe načela vzajemnega priznavanja, tako da se odpravijo obstoječe ovire, predvsem različni pristopi k "razlogom za nepriznanje".
The aim of the proposal is to promote application of the principle of mutual recognition by eliminating existing obstacles, mainly, different approaches towards "grounds for non-recognition".
Dodati je treba tudi peti zakonodajni akt o pogojnih kaznih, saj se prav tako nanaša na sodbe, izrečene brez navzočnosti zadevne osebe.
The fifth legislative act on probation should be added as it is also dealing with decisions rendered in absentia.
(1a) Z uporabo ukrepov na evropski ravni, s katerimi bi se zagotovila večja usklajenost in medsebojno priznavanje sodb v kazenskih zadevah, in s sprejetjem določenih evropskih določb in praks v kazenskih zadevah je treba okrepiti medsebojno zaupanje v evropsko območje svobode, varnosti in pravice v kazenskih zadevah.
(1a) It is necessary to strengthen mutual trust in the European area of freedom, security and justice in criminal matters by means of measures at European level designed to ensure greater harmonisation and mutual recognition of judgments in criminal matters and by adopting some European provisions and practices in criminal matters.
Predlog spremembe temelji na pojmu spodbujanja sistema evropskega kazenskega prava.
The amendment is based on the notion of promoting a body of European criminal law.
(1b) Za vzajemno priznavanje sodnih odločb v kazenskih zadevah so nujen pogoj ustrezna postopkovna varovala.
(1b ) Adequate procedural safeguards are a necessary pre condition for the mutual recognition of judicial decisions in criminal matters.
Zato je treba čimprej sprejeti okvirni sklep o postopkovnih pravicah v kazenskih postopkih.
I t is therefore important to adopt the f ramework d ecision on procedural rights in criminal proceedings as soon as possible.
(4) Zato so potrebne jasne in skupne rešitve, ki bi opredelile razloge za zavrnitev in določile manevrski prostor izvršilnega organa.
(4) It is therefore necessary to provide clear and common solutions which define the grounds for refusal and the discretion left to the executing authority.
(4) Zato so potrebne jasne in skupne rešitve, ki bi opredelile razloge za zavrnitev izvršitve odločbe, izdane po sojenju, na katerem zadevna oseba ni bila navzoča, in določile manevrski prostor izvršilnega organa.
(4) It is therefore necessary to provide clear and common solutions which define the grounds for refusal of the execution of the decision rendered following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person and the discretion left to the executing authority.
Namen okvirnega sklepa je določiti takšne skupne razloge, ki bi izvršilnemu organu omogočili izvršitev odločbe kljub temu, da oseba na sojenju ni bila navzoča.
The purpose of this Framework Decision is to define such common grounds to allow the executing authority to execute the decision despite the absence of the person at the trial.
Okvirni sklep ni namenjen urejanju veljavnih oblik in načinov ali postopkovnih zahtev, ki se uporabljajo za dosego rezultatov, opredeljenih v njem, saj so te določene z nacionalnim pravom držav članic.
It is not designed to regulate the applicable forms and methods, or the procedural requirements, that are used to achieve the results specified in this Framework Decision, which are a matter for the national law of the Member States.
Z izpolnitvijo ustrezne rubrike evropskega naloga za prijetje ali ustreznega potrdila iz drugih okvirnih sklepov organ izdaje zagotovi, da so bile ali bodo izpolnjene zahteve, ki naj bi zadostovale za izvršitev odločbe na podlagi načela vzajemnega priznavanja.
By completing the relevant section of the European arrest warrant or of the relevant certificate under the other Framework Decisions, the issuing authority gives an assurance that the requirements have been or will be met, which should be sufficient for the purposes of the execution of the decision on the basis of the principle of mutual recognition.
(6a) Priznanje in izvršitev odločbe, izdane po sojenju, na katerem tožena stranka ni bila navzoča, se ne bi smela zavrniti, če je na podlagi informacij države izdajateljice mogoče ustrezno sklepati, da je bila tožena stranka osebno povabljena ali kako drugače dejansko uradno obveščena o načrtovanem datumu in kraju sojenja.
(6a) The recognition and execution of a decision rendered following a trial at which the defendant did not appear in person should not be refused if, on the basis of the information provided by the issuing State, it is satisfactorily established that the defendant was summoned in person, or by other means actually received official information of the scheduled date and place of the trial.
Pri tem se razume, da je morala biti zadevna oseba obveščena pravočasno, kar pomeni dovolj zgodaj, da bi se lahko udeležila sojenja in učinkovito uveljavila svojo pravico do obrambe.
In this context it is understood that the person should have received such information in good time, i. e. sufficiently in advance to allow him or her to participate in the trial and to effectively exercise his/her right of defence.
Vse informacije morajo biti na voljo v jeziku, ki ga tožena stranka razume.
All information should be provided in a language which the defendant understands.
(5a) Priznanje in izvršitev odločbe, izdane po sojenju, na katerem zadevna oseba ni bila navzoča, se ne bi smela zavrniti, če je zadevno osebo, ki je bila seznanjena z načrtovanim sojenjem, na sojenju zastopal pravni zastopnik, ki ga je za to posebej pooblastila, s čimer je bila zagotovljena praktična in učinkovita pravna pomoč.
(5a) The recognition and execution of a decision following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person should not be refused where the person concerned, being aware of the scheduled trial, was defended at the trial by a legal counsellor to whom he/she had given an explicit mandate to do so, thus ensuring that the legal assistance was practical and effective.
V tem primeru bi moralo biti nepomembno, ali je pravnega zastopnika izbrala, določila in plačala zadevna oseba ali pa ga je določila in plačala država v skladu s svojim nacionalnim pravom, ki se uporablja pri uveljavljanju pravice do obrambe, pri čemer se razume, da se je zadevna oseba za pravnega zastopnika odločila zato, da se ne bi sama udeležila sojenja.
In this context, it should be immaterial whether the legal counsellor was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned, or was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, it being understood that the person concerned would have chosen to be represented by a legal counsellor instead of appearing him- or herself at the trial.
(6) V skupnih rešitvah glede razlogov za zavrnitev v obstoječih zadevnih okvirnih sklepih bi morala biti upoštevana raznolikost razmer na področju obvestitve obtožene osebe o pravici do ponovnega sojenja .
(6) Common solutions on grounds for refusal in the relevant existing Framework Decisions should take into account the diversity of situations with regard to informing the accused person of his right to a retrial .
(6) V skupnih rešitvah glede razlogov za nepriznanje v obstoječih zadevnih okvirnih sklepih bi morala biti upoštevana raznolikost razmer v zvezi s pravico zadevne osebe do ponovnega sojenja ali do pritožbe.
(6) Common solutions on grounds for non-recognition in the relevant existing Framework Decisions should take into account the diversity of situations with regard to the right of the person concerned to a retrial or to an appeal .
V nekaterih državah članicah je rešitev teh primerov obravnavana pri pravici do pritožbe in ne pri pravici do ponovnega sojenja.
In some Member States the solution given to these cases is addressed trough the right to appeal, rather than the right to a retrial.
(7b) Na ponovnem sojenju, ki sledi obsodbi po sojenju, na katerem zadevna oseba ni bila navzoča, mora biti tožena stranka v enakem položaju kot nekdo, ki se mu sodi prvič.
(7b) At a retrial following a conviction resulting from a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person , the defendant should be in the same position as someone standing trial for the first time.
Zato bi morala imeti zadevna oseba pravico, da je navzoča na ponovnem sojenju, vsebina primera, vključno z novimi dokazi pa bi se morala (ponovno) preučiti, pri čemer ponovno sojenje lahko vodi do razveljavitve prvotne odločbe, tožena stranka pa se lahko zoper novo odločbo pritoži.
Therefore the person concerned should have the right to be present at the retrial, the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, should be (re)examined, the retrial could result in the original decision being quashed and the defendant may appeal against the new decision.
Zelo pomembno je, da je na ponovnem sojenju, ki sledi obsodbi v nenavzočnosti, tožena stranka v enakem položaju kot nekdo, ki se mu sodi prvič.
It is of paramount importance that, in a retrial following an in absentia conviction, the defendant remains in the same position as someone being surrendered to stand trial for the first time.
Zlasti mora po ponovnem sojenju obstajati pravica do pritožbe v skladu s členom 2 protokola št. 7 k Evropski konvenciji o človekovih pravicah in členom 14(5) Mednarodnega pakta o državljanskih in političnih pravicah.
Especially, there must be a right to appeal after a retrial, in accordance with Article 2 of Protocol No. 7 to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and Article 14(5) of the ICCPR.
Ta okvirni sklep ne spreminja niti obveznosti spoštovanja temeljnih pravic in temeljnih pravnih načel iz člena 6 Pogodbe niti obveznosti, ki so v tem smislu naložene pravosodnim organom.
This Framework Decision shall not have the effect of modifying the obligation to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty, and any obligations incumbent upon judicial authorities in this respect shall remain unaffected.
Ta okvirni sklep ne spreminja niti obveznosti spoštovanja temeljnih pravic in temeljnih pravnih načel iz člena 6 Pogodbe o Evropski uniji niti obveznosti, ki so v tem smislu naložene pravosodnim organom.
This Framework Decision shall not have the effect of modifying the obligation to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union , and any obligations incumbent upon judicial authorities in this respect shall remain unaffected.
Prav je, da se natančno opredeli pogodba, ki se uporablja.
It is better to specify which Treaty is applicable.
Člen 1 – odstavek 3
Article 1 – paragraph 3
V področje uporabe tega okvirnega sklepa sodi določitev splošnih pravil za priznavanje in/ali izvrševanje odločb v eni državi članici (država članica izvršiteljica), ki jih izda druga država članica (država članica izdajateljica) v postopku , ki je potekal brez navzočnosti obtoženca, v skladu z določbami člena 5(1) Okvirnega sklepa 2002/584/PNZ, člena 7(2)(g) Okvirnega sklepa 2005/214/PNZ, člena 8(2)(e) Okvirnega sklepa 2006/783/PNZ in člena 9(1)(f) Okvirnega sklepa 2008/…/PNZ .
The scope of this Framework Decision is to establish common rules for the recognition and/or execution of judicial decisions in one Member State (the executing Member State) issued by another Member State (the issuing Member State) following proceedings where the person was not present, according to the provisions in Article 5(1) of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA, in Article 7(2)(g) of Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA, in Article 8(2)(e) of Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA and Article 9(1)(f) of Framework Decision 2008/…/JHA.
Natančna številka zadevnega člena bo dodana, ko bodo pravniki-lingvisti v Svetu dokončali besedilo o pogojnih kaznih.
The exact number of the relevant Article shall be added when the lawyers-linguists will finalise the Probation text in the Council.
Okvirni sklep 2002/584/PNZ
Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA
Člen 1 – odstavek 4
Article 1 – paragraph 4
1) v členu 1 se doda naslednji odstavek:
1) the following paragraph shall be added to Article 1:
Za namene tega okvirnega sklepa "odločba, izdana v nenavzočnosti," pomeni zaporno kazen ali ukrep, ki vključuje odvzem prostosti, če se oseba ni udeležila postopka, iz katerega izhaja ta odločba."
For the purpose of this Framework Decision, ' decision rendered in absentia ' shall mean a custodial sentence or a detention order when the person did not personally appear in the proceedings resulting in that decision. "
Člen 2 – točka 2
Article 2 – point 2
Člen 4a – odstavek 1
Article 4a – paragraph 1
Odločbe, izdane v nenavzočnosti
Decisions rendered in absentia
Odločbe, izdane po sojenju, na katerem zadevna oseba ni bila navzoča
Decisions rendered following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person
Izvršilni sodni organ lahko tudi zavrne izvršitev evropskega naloga za prijetje, ki je bil izdan za izvršitev zaporne kazni ali ukrepa, ki vključuje odvzem prostosti, če je bila odločba izdana v nenavzočnosti , razen če je v evropskem nalogu za prijetje navedeno, da je zadevna oseba:
The executing judicial authority may also refuse to execute the European arrest warrant issued for the purpose of executing a custodial sentence or a detention order, if the decision was rendered in absentia , unless the European arrest warrant states that the person:
Izvršilni sodni organ lahko tudi zavrne izvršitev evropskega naloga za prijetje, ki je bil izdan za izvršitev zaporne kazni ali ukrepa, ki vključuje odvzem prostosti, če je bila odločba izdana po sojenju , na katerem zadevna oseba ni bila navzoča, razen če je v evropskem nalogu za prijetje navedeno, da je bila zadevna oseba , v skladu z nacionalnim pravom države članice izdajateljice :
The executing judicial authority may also refuse to execute the European arrest warrant issued for the purpose of executing a custodial sentence or a detention order, if the decision was rendered following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person , unless the European arrest warrant states that the person , in accordance with the national law of the issuing Member State :
Člen 44 –odstavek 1 – točka (a)
Article 4a – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) bila osebno povabljena ali prek pristojnega zastopnika pravočasno in v skladu z nacionalnim pravom države članice izdajateljice odločbe obveščena o načrtovanem datumu in kraju obravnave , ki se je zaključila z odločbo, izdano v nenavzočnosti, ter bila obveščena o dejstvu, da se lahko takšna odločba izda v primeru, če se oseba ne udeleži sojenja;
(a) was summoned in person or informed in accordance with the national law of the issuing Member State through a competent representative and in due time , of the scheduled date and place of the hearing which led to the decision rendered in absentia and informed about the fact that such a decision may be handed down in case the person does not appear for the trial;
(a) pravočasno in v jeziku, ki ga je razumela,
(a) in due time, and in a language which he/she understood ,
(i) neposredno osebno povabljena ali kako drugače dejansko uradno obveščena o načrtovanem datumu in kraju sojenja na način , da je bilo mogoče nedvoumno sklepati, da je bila seznanjena s sojenjem,
(i) either was directly summoned in person or by other means actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he/she was aware of the trial,
(ii) osebno obveščena, da se lahko odločba izda tudi, če se ne udeleži sojenja;
(ii) was personally informed that the decision may be handed down if he/she did not appear for the trial;
Člen 4a – odstavek 1 – točka a a (novo)
Article 4a – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) po tem, ko je bila neposredno osebno povabljena ali kako drugače dejansko uradno obveščena o načrtovanem datumu in kraju sojenja na način, da je mogoče nedvoumno sklepati, da je bila seznanjena s sojenjem, izrecno pooblastila pravnega zastopnika, ki ga je izbrala, določila in plačala ali ga je določila in plačala država v skladu s svojim nacionalnim pravom, ki se uporablja pri uveljavljanju pravice do obrambe, in jo je zastopnik dejansko zastopal na sojenju;
(aa) having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he/she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial;
Člen 4a – odstavek 1 – točka b
Article 4a – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) potem , ko ji je bila vročena odločba , izdana v nenavzočnosti, in je bila izrecno obveščena o pravici do ponovnega sojenja in pravici da je prisotna na tem sojenju :
(b) after being served with the decision rendered in absentia and being expressly informed about the right to a retrial and to be present at that trial:
(b) po tem , ko ji je bila osebno vročena odločba in je bila izrecno obveščena v jeziku, ki ga je razumela, o pravici do pritožbe* ali do ponovnega sojenja , na katerem bi imela pravico sodelovati in na katerem bi se vsebina primera, vključno z novimi dokazi, (ponovno) preučila, kar bi lahko vodilo do razveljavitve prvotne odločbe :
(b) after being personally served with the decision and being expressly informed, in a language which he/she understood , about the right to a retrial or to an appeal* , in which he/she would have the right to participate, the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed :
(i) oseba izrecno izjavila, da ne izpodbija odločbe , izdane v nenavzočnosti ;
(i) expressly stated that he or she does not contest the decision rendered in absentia ;
(i) izrecno izjavila, da ne izpodbija odločbe;
(i) expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision;
(ii) ni zahtevala ponovnega sojenja v ustreznem roku, ki je vsaj […]¹dni ,
(ii) did not request a retrial in the applicable timeframe which was of at least […]¹days ;
(ii) ni zahtevala ponovnega sojenja ali vložila pritožbe v ustreznem roku, ki je vsaj 10 dni in najdlje 15dni ,
(ii) did not request a retrial or an appeal in the applicable timeframe, which shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days.
( * Predlog spremembe velja za celotno besedilo.
( * This amendment applies throughout the text.
Če bo sprejet, bo treba ob vsaki omembi ponovnega sojenja omeniti tudi pritožbo.
Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout (each time there is a reference to a retrial the expression “or an appeal " should be added . )
Člen 4a ­– odstavek 1 – točka c
Article 4a – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) ji odločba , izdana v nenavzočnosti, ni bila osebno vročena, ampak:
(c) was not personally served with the decision rendered in absentia but:
(c) ji odločba ni bila osebno vročena, ampak:
(c) was not personally served with the decision but:
(i) ji bo vročena vsaj peti dan po predaji in bo izrecno obveščena o pravici do ponovnega sojenja in pravici , da je prisotna na tem sojenju ;
(i) will be served with it at the latest on the fifth day after the surrender and will be expressly informed about the right to a retrial and to be present at that trial;
(i) ji bo osebno vročena takoj in v vsakem primere najkasneje v treh dneh po predaji ter bo v jeziku, ki ga razume, izrecno obveščena o pravici do pritožbe ali do ponovnega sojenja , na katerem ima pravico sodelovati in na katerem se bo lahko vsebina primera, vključno z novimi dokazi, (ponovno) preučila, kar lahko vodi do razveljavitve prvotne odločbe ;
(i) will be personally served with it immediately and in any event not later than three days after the surrender and will be expressly informed in a language which he/she understands about the right to a retrial or an appeal , in which he/she will have the right to participate and which will allow the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, to be (re)examined and which may lead to the original decision being quashed ;
(ii) bo imela vsaj […]¹ dni, da zahteva ponovno sojenje;
(ii) will have at least […]¹ days to request a retrial.
(ii) bo obveščena o časovnem roku, ki je vsaj 10 dni in najdlje 15 dni , v katerem mora zahtevati ponovno sojenje ali vložiti pritožbo ;
(ii) will be informed about the timeframe , which shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days within which he/she must request such a retrial or appeal ;
¹ Rok bo določen naknadno.
¹ Period to be provided.
Člen 4a – odstavek 1 a (novo)
Article 4a – paragraph 1 a (new)
Če je evropski nalog za prijetje izdan za izvršitev zaporne kazni ali ukrepa, ki vključuje odvzem prostosti, v skladu s pogoji iz odstavka (1)(c) in če zadevna oseba pred tem ni bila uradno obveščena o kazenskem postopku proti njej, lahko ob prejetju obvestila o vsebini evropskega naloga za prijetje pred predajo zahteva kopijo sodbe.
If a European arrest warrant is issued for the purpose of executing a custodial sentence or detention order under the conditions set out in paragraph (1)(c) and the person concerned has not previously received any official information about the existence of the criminal proceedings against him or her, that person, when he or she is informed about the content of the European arrest warrant, may request a copy of the judgment before being surrendered.
Pravosodni organ izdaje, takoj ko je o zahtevi obveščen, posreduje kopijo sodbe osebi, ki je to zahtevala, prek izvršilnega sodnega organa.
Immediately after having been informed of that request, the issuing judicial authority shall provide a copy of the judgment via the executing judicial authority to the person who has made the request .
Če je sodba v jeziku, ki ga zadevna oseba ne razume, pravosodni organ izdaje prek izvršilnega sodnega organa posreduje povzetek sodbe v jeziku, ki ga oseba razume.
If the judgment is rendered in a language which the person concerned does not understand, the issuing judicial authority via the executing judicial authority shall provide an extract of the judgment in a language which the person concerned understands.
Posredovanje sodbe ali povzetka sodbe zadevni osebi je le informativnega značaja in se ga ne more tolmačiti kot uradno storitev v okviru sodbe oziroma ne sproži nobenih časovnih rokov za zahtevanje ponovnega sojenja ali vložitev pritožbe.
The provision of the judgment or an extract of the judgment to the person concerned shall be for information purposes only; it shall not be construed as constituting formal service of the judgment n or shall it activate any time-limits applicable for requesting a retrial or appeal .
Člen 2 – točka 4
Article 2 – point 4
Priloga – polje d – točka 1 – odstavek 2
Annex – box d – points 1 and 2
(d) Navedite, ali je bila odločba izdana v nenavzočnosti :
(d) Indicate if the decision was rendered in absentia :
(d) Navedite, ali je bila oseba navzoča na sojenju, ki se je zaključilo z odločbo :
(d) Indicate if the person appeared in person at the trial resulting in the decision :
1.  Ne, ni bila.
1.  No, it was not
1. Da, oseba je bila navzoča na sojenju, ki se je zaključilo z odločbo .
1.  Yes, the person appeared in person at the trial resulting in the decision.
2.  Da, bila je .
2.  Yes, it was.
Če ste odgovorili z " da ", prosimo potrdite :
If you have answered yes, please confirm that:
2.  Ne, oseba ni bila navzoča na sojenju, ki se je zaključilo z odločbo .
2.  No, the person did not appear in person at the trial resulting in the decision.
Če ste na to vprašanje odgovorili z " ne ", prosimo navedite, ali :
If you answered “no” to this question , please indicate if:
Priloga – polje d – točka 2.1
Annex – box d – point 2.1