natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
K. ker je dobro sodelovanje s pristojnimi službami Parlamenta v letu 2010 pomenilo, da 91 pritožb (4,7 %) državljanov ni bilo registriranih, saj niso izpolnjevale minimalnih meril, po katerih bi jih lahko obravnavali kot peticije, kar je v skladu s priporočili iz letnega poročila za leto 2009, da se ne registrira peticij, ki ne izpolnjujejo minimalnih pogojev,
K. whereas successful cooperation with the relevant services at Parliament in 2010 meant that 91 complaints (4.7 %) filed by citizens were rejected for failing to meet the minimum criteria to qualify as petitions, as per the recommendations in the 2009 annual report, which stated that petitions not meeting the necessary conditions should not be recorded,
L. ker bi bilo treba zaradi števila nedopustnih peticij, prejetih v letu 2010 (40 %), posebno pozornost nameniti obveščanju državljanov o pristojnostih Odbora za peticije in vlogi različnih institucij Unije;
L. whereas the number of inadmissible petitions received in 2010 (40 %) indicates that efforts should continue to be made to raise citizens’ awareness of the competences of the Committee on Petitions and the role of the various EU institutions,
M. ker bi postopek peticij lahko dopolnjeval druge evropske instrumente, ki jih imajo na voljo državljani, kot je na primer naslavljanje pritožb na evropskega varuha človekovih pravic ali na Komisijo,
M. whereas the petitions process could complement other measures open to citizens at EU level, such as the filing of complaints with the European Ombudsman or the Commission,
N. ker imajo državljani pravico do hitrega in učinkovitega reševanja njihovih težav in ker je Parlament Komisijo večkrat zaprosil, naj kot varuhinja pogodb uporabi svoje posebno pooblastilo ter ukrepa proti kršitvam evropske zakonodaje, ki so jih razkrili vlagatelji peticij, zlasti kršitvam zakonodaje Evropske unije pri prenosu na nacionalno raven,
N. whereas citizens are entitled to speedy and solution-oriented redress and whereas Parliament has repeatedly asked the Commission to use its prerogatives as guardian of the Treaty to act against breaches of European legislation revealed by petitioners, especially where the transposition of EU legislation at national level results in its infringement,
O. ker mnoge peticije še vedno opozarjajo na pomanjkljivosti pri prenosu in izvajanju evropske zakonodaje s področja notranjega trga in okolja in ker je Odbor za peticije Komisijo že večkrat pozval, naj na teh področjih poskrbi za strožji in učinkovitejši nadzor nad izvajanjem zakonodaje,
O. whereas many petitions continue to raise concerns about the transposition and implementation of European legislation on the environment and the internal market, and whereas the Committee on Petitions has already called on the Commission to ensure that enforcement checks in these areas are strengthened and made more efficient,
P. ker lahko Komisija v celoti preveri skladnost z zakonodajo Evropske unije šele, ko so nacionalni organi že sprejeli končno odločitev, ker pa je treba – zlasti pri okoljskih zadevah – že v zgodnji fazi preveriti, ali lokalne, regionalne in nacionalne oblasti pravilno izvajajo vse ustrezne postopkovne zahteve zakonodaje Evropske unije, vključno z upoštevanjem previdnostnega načela,
P. whereas, although the Commission can fully check compliance with EU law only when a final decision has been taken by national authorities, it is important – particularly in relation to environmental matters – to verify at an early stage that local, regional and national authorities correctly apply all relevant procedural requirements under EU law, including implementation of the principle of precaution,
Q. ker so številne peticije vezane na projekte z možnimi posledicami za okolje in bi bilo zato dobro, če bi Odbor te peticije, ki se nanašajo na projekte, glede katerih poteka preiskava v javnem interesu, obravnaval na način, ki bi omogočal optimalno sprejemanje odločitev tako za vlagatelje kot za napredovanje projekta,
Q. whereas, given that very many petitions relate to projects with a potential environmental impact, it would be desirable for the Committee on Petitions to consider treating such petitions, relating to projects which are the subject of a public inquiry, in a way which optimises the committee’s decision-making time vis-à-vis both the petitioner and the state of progress of the project,
R. ker je treba preprečiti dodatne nepovratne izgube biotske raznolikosti, zlasti na zaščitenih območjih Natura 2000, in ker so se države članice zavezale varovanju posebnih ohranitvenih območij iz direktive o habitatih (92/43/EGS) in direktive o pticah (79/409/EGS),
R. bearing in mind the importance of preventing further irreparable losses in biodiversity, especially inside Natura 2000 designated sites, and the commitment by Member States to guarantee protection of special conservation areas under the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) and the Birds Directive (79/409 EEC),
S. ker peticije opozarjajo na vpliv evropske zakonodaje na vsakdanje življenje državljanov Unije; ker je treba sprejeti vse potrebne ukrepe za utrditev doseženega napredka pri krepitvi pravic državljanov Unije,
S. whereas petitions highlight the impact of European legislation on the everyday lives of EU citizens; whereas all necessary steps to consolidate the progress achieved in reinforcing European citizens’ rights need to be taken,
T. ker znatno število peticij ostaja nerešenih, saj je Komisija sprožila postopek za ugotavljanje kršitev, zaradi česar je Odbor za peticije v prejšnjem poročilu o delu in v mnenju o letnem poročilu Komisije o spremljanju uporabe prava Skupnosti zaprosil Komisijo, naj ga redno obvešča o fazah, v katerih so postopki za ugotavljanje kršitev iz peticij,
T. whereas, bearing in mind the significant number of petitions pending subject to infringement procedures launched by the Commission, the Committee on Petitions, in its previous activity report and its opinion on the Commission’s annual report on monitoring the application of Community law, requested regular updates on the progress of infringement procedures related to petitions,
U. ker je Odbor za peticije po misijah za ugotavljanje dejstev v Huelvi (Španija), Kampaniji (Italija) in Vorarlbergu (Avstrija) pripravil priporočila v zvezi z ravnanjem s strupenimi in komunalnimi odpadki ter s prenosom direktive o okoljskih vplivih v nacionalno zakonodajo,
U. having regard to the recommendations on toxic and urban waste management and on transposition of the Environmental Impact Directive into national law made by the Committee on Petitions following the fact-finding missions to Huelva (Spain), Campania (Italy) and Vorarlberg (Austria),
V. ob upoštevanju odstavka 32 svoje resolucije z dne 6. julija 2010 o razpravah Odbora za peticije v letu 2009
V. having regard to paragraph 32 of its resolution of 6 July 2010 on the deliberations of the Committee of Petitions during the year 2009
Sprejeta besedila, P7_TA-PROV(2010)0261 . , v katerem Parlament zahteva revizijo postopka evidentiranja peticij,
Texts adopted, P7_TA-PROV(2010)0261 . with regard to Parliament’s request for the revision of the registration process for petitions,
W. ker je Odbor za pravne zadeve pripravil mnenje o peticiji 0163/2010, ki jo je vložil P.B.
W. whereas the Committee on Legal Affairs has given an opinion on Petition 0163/2010 by P.B.
(Nemčija) o tem, ali so tretje strani na Evropskem sodišču lahko navzoče ob predhodnem odločanju,
(German) on third-party access to the European Court of Justice for preliminary rulings,
5. opozarja na Uredbo (EU) št. 211/2011 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 16. februarja 2011 o državljanski pobudi
Draws attention to Regulation (EU) No 211/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 on the citizens’ initiative
UL L 65, 11.3.2011, str.
OJ L 65, 11.3.2011, p.
1. , novem instrumentu za udeležbo državljanov Unije;
1. , a new instrument enabling citizens to participate in EU business;
9. vseeno poudarja, da Evropska komisija kljub velikemu številu peticij, ki se nanašajo na pravice iz Listine, zaradi pomanjkanja instrumentov stalno zavrača ukrepe za preprečitev očitnih kršitev temeljnih pravic v državah članica;
Stresses, however, that, in spite of the large number of petitions concerning the rights contained in the Charter, the Commission consistently refuses, owing to a lack of legal instruments, to take action to prevent flagrant breaches of fundamental rights in the Member States;
14. je seznanjen, da so bile peticije v letu 2010 še naprej osredotočene na okolje, temeljne pravice, pravosodje in notranji trg; dodaja, da se je z geografskega vidika večina peticij nanašala na eno od držav članic – Španijo (16 %) – in Unijo kot celoto (16 %), sledile pa so Nemčija, Italija in Romunija;
Notes that petitions received in 2010 continued to focus on the environment, fundamental rights, the internal market and justice; adds that in geographical terms, the largest proportion of petitions referred to a specific Member State – Spain (16 %) – or the Union as a whole (16 %), followed by Germany, Italy and Romania;
17. meni, da bi morala Evropska komisija strožje nadzirati spoštovanje in izvajanje evropske okoljske zakonodaje, in sicer v vseh fazah postopka, ne le po sprejetju končne odločitve;
Considers that the Commission should monitor compliance with and implementation of European environmental legislation more strictly at every point in the proceedings, and not only when a final ruling has been given;
21. priznava vlogo mreže SOLVIT, ki redno razkriva težave pri izvajanju pravil o notranjem trgu, na katere opozarjajo vlagatelji peticij, in poziva, naj se Odbor za peticije obvešča o nepravilnostih pri izvajanju zakonodaje EU, saj lahko peticije prispevajo k izboljšanju zakonodaje;
Acknowledges the role of the SOLVIT network, which regularly uncovers problems linked to the application of internal market rules brought to light by petitioners, and calls for the Committee on Petitions to be informed of any cases of incorrect application of EU law, given that the petitions procedure can help improve legislation;
23. pozdravlja udeležbo komisarjev na svojih sejah ter njihovo tesno in učinkovito sodelovanje z Odborom, s čimer je bil vzpostavljen pomemben kanal za komunikacijo med državljani in institucijami EU;
Welcomes the attendance at its meetings of various Commissioners, who have cooperated closely and effectively with the Committee on Petitions and set up an important channel of communication between citizens and EU institutions;
26. poziva Komisijo, naj ustrezno prizna vlogo peticij pri nadzorovanju učinkovite uporabe prava Unije, saj so ponavadi prvi kazalniki, da države članice zaostajajo pri izvajanju zakonodajnih ukrepov;
Calls on the Commission to duly recognise the role of petitions in monitoring the effective implementation of EU law, since petitions are usually the earliest indications that Member States are lagging behind in implementing legal measures;
30. ugotavlja, da narašča število vlagateljev peticij, ki se na Parlament obrnejo po pravna sredstva v primerih, ki ne sodijo v pristojnosti Evropske unije, kot je na primer izvrševanje sodb nacionalnih sodišč ali neukrepanje javne uprave, in namerava omenjene pritožbe posredovati pristojnim nacionalnim oziroma regionalnim organom; odobrava novi postopek, ki sta ga za evidentiranje peticij uvedla generalna direktorata Parlamenta Predsedstvo in IPOL;
Takes note of the number of petitioners who turn to Parliament for redress on issues that fall outside the EU’s area of competence – such as the enforcement of national courts’ decisions or passivity on the part of various administrations – and points out that Parliament attempts to resolve the situation by forwarding these complaints to the competent authorities; welcomes the new procedure put in place by Parliament’s DG Presidency and DG IPOL with regard to the registration of petitions;
34. naroči svojemu predsedniku, naj to resolucijo in poročilo Odbora za peticije posreduje Svetu, Komisiji, evropskemu varuhu človekovih pravic, vladam in parlamentom držav članic in njihovim odborom za peticije ter varuhom človekovih pravic oziroma podobnim pristojnim organom.
Instructs its President to forward this resolution and the report of the Committee on Petitions to the Council, the Commission, the European Ombudsman, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, their committees on petitions and their ombudsmen or similar competent bodies.
Letno poročilo za leto 2010 vsebuje pregled dejavnosti Odbora za peticije, katerih koledar ni odvisen od zakonodajnega programa Evropske komisije, temveč ga določajo državljani, ki uveljavljajo svojo pravico do vložitve peticije pri Evropskem parlamentu.
The 2010 Annual Report aims to provide an overview of the activities of the Committee on Petitions, for which the calendar of activities is not fixed around the legislative programme of the European Commission, but is set by the citizens who exercise their right to petition the European Parliament.
Letno poročilo ponuja natančen in popoln pregled dela Odbora za peticije.
The Annual Report aims to offer a precise and full view of the work of the Committee on Petitions.
Vsebuje vrsto statističnih podatkov o številu peticij, ki jih je odbor prejel, zaključil in obravnaval, o vpletenih državah in vprašanjih, ki so bila načeta.
This Report presents a series of statistics on the number of petitions received, closed or dealt with by the Committee, the countries involved and the matters raised.
Statistični podatki so pomembno kvantitativno orodje za ocenjevanje dela odbora.
These statistics represent an important quantitative tool for assessing the Committee’s work.
Ta pregled dopolnjujejo dodatni vidiki, kot so odnosi z drugimi evropskimi institucijami, nacionalnimi ali regionalnim organi ter institucionalne spremembe, ki so neposredno vplivale na dejavnosti odbora.
Additional aspects, such as relations with other European institutions and with national and regional authorities or institutional changes with direct impact on the Committee’s activities, complete the picture.
Poročilo vsebuje tudi pregled napredka, doseženega pri izvajanju prejšnjih priporočil glede izboljšanja dela odbora.
Last but not least, the Report examines the progress made in implementing previous recommendations aimed at improving the work of this Committee.
Pravica do vložitve peticije v Evropskem parlamentu: temeljni kamen evropskega državljanstva
The right to petition the European Parliament: a cornerstone of European citizenship
Tako lahko državljani Evropskemu parlamentu predstavijo zaskrbljenost nad posledicami različnih politik in zakonodaje EU na njihovo vsakdanje življenje.
This tool allows citizens to bring before Parliament their concerns about the impact of various EU policies and legislation on their everyday lives.
Letni statistični podatki kažejo, da se večina državljanov na Evropski parlament obrne s prošnjo za pomoč v zadevah, ki se nanašajo na okolje, temeljne pravice, pravosodje in notranji trg.
The annual statistics show that most citizens turn to Parliament for assistance with matters relating to the environment, fundamental rights, justice and the internal market.
Nekateri imajo predloge glede razvoja evropskih politik, spet drugi pa se želijo Evropskemu parlamentu pritožiti zoper odločitev nacionalnih organov ali zoper sodb nacionalnih sodišč.
Last but not least, other citizens address the European Parliament to appeal against decisions taken by national authorities and to complain about rulings of national courts.
Največ pa se jih vendarle pritoži zaradi neustreznega izvajanja zakonodaje EU ali zaradi nepravilnega prenosa te zakonodaje ali preprosto zaradi neizvajanja evropskih pravil oziroma njihovega kršenja.
However, most complain about the incorrect application of EU legislation, either due to imperfect transposition of that legislation or due to failures to apply, or breaches of, European rules.
Statistični podatki kažejo, da je Evropski parlament v letu 2010 prejel 1655 peticij, kar je 14 % manj kot v letu 2009, ko jih je bilo 1924.
According to the statistics, in 2010 the European Parliament received 1 655 petitions, which represents a drop of 14% compared to the 1 924 petitions submitted in 2009.
To jasno kaže na spremembo v trendu, saj se je število peticij v zadnjih letih nenehno povečevalo.
This clearly shows a change in trend following the constant rise in the number of petitions in recent years.
Statistična analiza peticij, prejetih v letu 2010, v primerjavi z letom 2009
Statistical analysis of petitions received in 2010 compared to 2009
Obravnava peticij
Outcome of petitions
Število peticij
No of petitions
Dopustne in zaključene
Admissible and closed
Posredovane v mnenje Komisiji
Referred to the Commission for an opinion
Posredovane v mnenje drugim organom
Referred to other bodies for an opinion
Posredovane v informacijo drugim organom
Referred to other bodies for information
Spodnji podatki kažejo, da so statistični podatki za leti 2010 in 2009 primerljivi.
Yet again 2010 statistics are very similar to 2009 figures, as may be noted from the data below.
V primerjavi z letom 2009 je prišlo do nekaterih sprememb pri državah, iz katerih je prišlo največ peticij: v letu 2010 je na vrhu Španija, ki je s prvega mesta izrinila Evropsko unijo kot celoto, sledijo pa ji Nemčija, Italija, Romunija, Grčija, Združeno kraljestvo in Poljska.
Compared to 2009, a small number of changes were registered in the list of countries most concerned by petitions: first place was claimed by Spain, which overtook the EU as a whole and pushed it into second place, followed by Germany, Italy, Romania, Greece, the UK and Poland.
Podobno kot lani je na zadnjem mestu spet Luksemburg, za Slovenijo in Latvijo.
Like last year, Luxembourg is once again in last place, below Slovenia and Latvia.
Kot smo že omenili, je okolje tudi tokrat največja skrb vlagateljev peticij, saj sta se število in delež peticij s tega področja povečala, sledijo pa temeljne pravice, notranji trg in pravosodje.
As already mentioned, once again the environment remains the main issue of concern for petitioners, with the number and percentage of petitions in this area having increased, followed by fundamental rights, the internal market and justice.
Poudariti velja, da se je število peticij o vračanju premoženja v primerjavi s prejšnjimi leti občutno zmanjšalo.
It should also be noted that the number of petitions on property restitution has fallen significantly in comparison to previous years.
Nepremičnine in njihovo vračanje
Property and Restitution
Izobraževanje in kultura
Education and Culture
Opaziti je rahle razlike pri razčlenitvi peticij po jezikih: v letu 2010, podobno kot v letu 2009, ostajata glavna jezika peticij nemščina in angleščina, na tretjem in četrtem mestu jima sledita španščina in italijanščina, pri čemer velja opozoriti, da število in delež peticij v teh dveh jezikih naraščata.
Slight changes can also be seen in the breakdown of petitions by language: in 2010, as in 2009, German and English remain the two main languages used by petitioners, followed by Spanish and Italian in third and fourth, although the latter are increasing in percentage and number.
Malteščina, estonščina in slovenščina so na zadnjih treh mestih.
Maltese, Estonian and Slovenian come last.
Kar zadeva narodnost, Nemci ostajajo najbolj dejavni vlagatelji peticij, sledijo pa jim kot v letu 2009 Španci in Italijani.
As regards nationality, Germans remain the most active petitioners, followed by Spaniards and Italians, as in 2009.
Takoj za njimi na lestvici so Romuni, Poljaki in Britanci.
Romanian, Polish and British petitioners come next in the ranking.
Estonski, slovenski in slovaški državljani so na dnu, saj so v letu 2010 skupaj vložili samo 10 peticij.
Estonian, Slovenian and Slovakian citizens come last, as together they only submitted 10 petitions in 2010.
Državljanstvo prvotnega vlagatelja peticije
Nationality of main petitioner
Kar zadeva obliko peticij, se nadaljuje trend iz leta 2009: vlagatelji peticije vse pogosteje vlagajo prek interneta, manj pa jih pošljejo v pisni obliki (v letu 2010 je bilo 63,2 % vseh prejetih peticij poslanih po e-pošti, v primerjavi z 62,6 % v letu 2009).
With regard to the format of petitions, the trend seen in 2009 is continuing: petitioners are increasingly submitting their petitions via the Internet, rather than by traditional letter (63.2% of petitions received in 2010 were sent by e-mail, compared to 62.6% in 2009).
Oblika poslanih peticij
Format of petition
Kar zadeva status peticij, jih je bila velika večina – 70,8 % – zaključenih v letu dni po vložitvi.
As regards the status of petitions, the vast majority (70.8%) are closed within a year of being submitted.
Le majhno število peticij po štirih letih ostaja nezaključenih.
Only a very small number of petitions remain open after four years.
V večini primerov so razlog za to pravni postopki, sproženi v državah članicah, postopki za ugotavljanje kršitev na Sodišču Evropske unije ali peticije o državah članicah.
In most cases these petitions are still open due to legal proceedings initiated in Member States, infringement proceedings before the Court of Justice or petitions about Member States.
Status peticij
Status of petitions
Analiza statističnih podatkov kaže, da je bil v večini primerov razlog za to, da so bile peticije razglašene za nedopustne, dejstvo, da vlagatelji še vedno ne razlikujejo med evropskimi in nacionalnimi pristojnostmi, pa tudi med institucijami EU in Sveta Evrope ter Evropskim sodiščem za človekove pravice.
An analysis of the statistics shows that, for those petitions declared inadmissible, this is mainly because petitioners continue to confuse the European and national competences, and the EU institutions and those of the Council of Europe, in particular the European Court of Human Rights.
To dejstvo priča, da si je treba bolj prizadevati za obveščanje državljanov o tem, kaj je pravica do peticije in kaj lahko dosežejo z njeno vložitvijo pri Evropskem parlamentu.
This shows that efforts must be stepped up to better inform citizens of what the right of petition is all about and what can be achieved when submitting a petition to Parliament.
Eden od načinov, kako to doseči, so izboljšave spletnega mesta za peticije, tako na portalu Evropske unije kot na portalu Evropskega parlamenta.
One step that should be taken is to improve the petition webpage, both on the European Union gateway and on the European Parliament’s own gateway.
Tako bi imeli državljani, ki peticije oddajajo prek spleta, na voljo informacije o pristojnostih Parlamenta, ocenjevanju peticij, delu Odbora za peticije in možnostih za hitrejšo rešitev z drugimi mehanizmi na ravni EU ali nacionalni ravni (SOLVIT, EU Pilot, ECC-Net, evropski varuh človekovih pravic, nacionalni varuhi človekovih pravic in nacionalni parlamentarni odbori za peticije).
In this way, citizens submitting petitions online would have access to all the information needed about the competences of Parliament, the assessment of petitions, the work of the Committee on Petitions, and the possibility of obtaining faster redress by using other tools available to them at EU or national level (SOLVIT, EU Pilot, ECC-Net, European Ombudsman, national Ombudsmen or national parliamentary committees on petitions).
To poročilo, podobno kot prejšnja, opozarja, da bi morali imeti državljani na ravni EU „enotno okence“, kjer bi lahko našli nasvet za domnevne kršitve njihovih pravic.
In line with calls made in previous reports, this report intends to stress the need to create a Europe-wide one-stop shop to provide advice for citizens who consider that their rights have been infringed.
To še naprej ostaja zelo pomemben cilj.
It does remain a very important objective to reach.
Kljub vsemu je treba dobro pojasniti razliko med uradnimi (pritožbe pri Evropski komisiji, peticije pri Parlamentu, pritožbe pri evropskem varuhu človekovih pravic) in neuradnimi mehanizmi (SOLVIT, ECC-Net, FIN-Net itd.).
However, the distinction between formal mechanisms (complaints to the European Commission, petitions to Parliament, complaints to the European Ombudsman) and informal mechanisms (SOLVIT, ECC-Net, FIN-Net, etc.) must be explained and clarified.