natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Poročevalec meni, da je treba z vidika sodbe Sodišča o označevanju krme upoštevati tako pravico kupcev do obveščenosti kot tudi upravičen interes proizvajalca, da varuje svojo intelektualno lastnino.
Your rapporteur takes the view that, in the light of the ECJ judgment on the labelling of feedingstuffs, care must be taken to ensure that the purchaser's right to information is respected just as much as the justified interest of the manufacturer in preserving his intellectual property.
Vsekakor pa proizvajalec sam ne mora odločati, ali bo izpolnil kupčevo zahtevo po poizvedbi ali ne.
However, a decision whether or not to accede to a customer’s request should not remain a matter solely for the manufacturer.
Načelo „odprtega označevanja“ je treba v okviru izrečene sodbe Sodišča in predloženega zakonodajnega predloga tolmačiti tako, da je kupcu načeloma dana možnost, po potrebi na utemeljeno zahtevo, do obveščenosti v okviru zakonsko določenega postopka.
In the context of the ECJ judgment and the present legislative proposal the principle of ‘open declaration’ should be interpreted in such a way that the purchaser is accorded the basic possibility of obtaining information – where appropriate on the basis of a substantiated request – within the framework of a legally established procedure.
Predlogi sprememb na osnutek poročila predvidevajo naslednje spremembe:
The amendments to the draft report seek the following changes:
Vsi posamični izdelki se obvezno navedejo v padajočem vrstnem redu glede na njihov masni delež.
The listing of all feed ingredients in descending order of their proportions by weight shall be compulsory.
Navedba masnih odstotkov je prostovoljna z izjemo primerov, navedenih v členu 17(2)(1).
The provision of information about the proportions by weight in percentages shall be voluntary, except in the cases specified in Article 17(2)(1).
Kupec lahko od proizvajalca zahteva informacijo o masnih deležih.
Purchasers shall be entitled to request information about the proportions by weight from the manufacturer.
Ta navedba mora biti točna, saj odstopanje +/– 15 % po procesu proizvodnje ni upravičeno.
This information must be precise since a percentage variation of +/- 15% after the production process seems unwarranted.
Proizvajalec lahko zavrne razkritje informacij, če lahko utemeljeno dokaže, da bi razkritje kršilo njegove pravice intelektualne lastnine, to pomeni, če lahko dokaže, da na podlagi lastnih ali kupljenih raziskav dejansko razpolaga z intelektualno lastnino, ki je upravičeno zaščitena.
The manufacturer may refuse to disclose information if he is able to prove that his intellectual property rights would thereby be infringed, i.e. if he is able to prove that he actually possesses intellectual property which deserves protection derived from his own research or from purchased research findings.
Za glavne sestavine krmne mešanice z masnim deležem, višjim od 2 %, ta možnost ne pride v poštev, saj na tem področju po navedbah industrije ni možno uveljavljati pravic intelektualne lastnine.
However, this possibility is excluded for the main ingredients of compound feed accounting for more than 2% of the weight of the product since, according to the industry, no intellectual property rights can be invoked in this connection.
Če proizvajalec zavrne razkritje informacij v zvezi z masnimi deleži za sestavine z masnim deležem, manjšim od 2 %, se lahko kupec obrne na pristojni organ.
If the manufacturer invokes his right to refuse disclosure of proportions by weight for ingredients accounting for less than 2% of the product, the purchaser may appeal to the competent authority.
Organ je na eni strani v vsakem trenutku pooblaščen, da preveri natančno sestavo krmne mešanice, hkrati pa lahko preveri sklicevanje na pravice intelektualne lastnine.
This authority is empowered at any time to obtain information on the precise composition of the compound feed and may also examine whether the claim to intellectual property rights is justified.
Po preučitvi sklicevanj proizvajalca na pravico do varovanja svoje intelektualne lahko organ po potrebi razkritje informacij o natančni sestavi mešanice pogojuje s podpisom dogovora o nerazkrivanju informacij.
After examining the manufacturer's claims to the protection of his intellectual property, the authority may require a confidentiality declaration to be signed as a precondition for disclosure of information on the precise composition of the feed.
Besedilo, sprejeto v odboru, spoštuje ta pristop.
The text adopted by the committee essentially follows this approach.
Vendar določa, da lahko proizvajalec/trgovec odgovori na zahtevo stranke za informacije o sestavi krmne mešanice z odstopanjem +/– 15% od navedene vrednosti.
However, it provides that the producer/trader may reply to a request from the customer for information about the composition of compound feed with a margin of +/- 15% of the declared value.
Ker se s tem spoštuje interes proizvajalca za varstvo njegovih pravic intelektualne lastnine v skladu s sodbo Sodišča v zadevi C-421/06, je bila opuščena določba, da se proizvajalcem dovoli zavrniti zagotovitev informacij s sklicevanjem na varstvo pravic intelektualne lastnine.
Since this satisfies the producer's interest in protecting his intellectual property rights, in accordance with the ECJ judgment in Case C-421/06, the clause allowing producers to refuse to provide information by referring to the protection of intellectual property rights has been dropped.
Označevanje krmnih dodatkov
Labelling of the feed additives
Komisija predlaga obvezno označevanje dodatkov, za katere so pri odobritvi predvidene mejne vrednosti ali so zootehnične narave ali pa se uporabljajo za zatiranje določenih zajedavcev.
The Commission proposes that the labelling of additives for which a maximum content is set or which have zootechnical or anti-parasitical action.
Označevanje ostalih dodatkov ni obvezno.
Other additives may be labelled on a voluntary basis.
Vendar je kupec na zahtevo tudi v tem primeru upravičen do informacije o uporabi krmnih dodatkov.
Furthermore, information on the use of additives must also be supplied to consumers upon request.
Poročevalec predlaga razjasnitev tega predpisa.
Your rapporteur proposes that this provision be made more precise.
Samoregulacija s kodeksi ali smernicami
Self-regulation as part of the codes or guidelines
Izkušnje z zakonodajo o higieni živil (uredbi (ES) št. 852/2003 in št. 853/2003) in o higieni krme (Uredba (ES) št. 183/2005) so pokazale, da so lahko smernice in kodeksi ravnanja, ki jih je pripravila industrija, koristni pri praktičnem izvajanju zakonskih določb.
Experience with legislation on food hygiene (Regulation (EC) No. 852/2003 and No. 853/2003) and on feed hygiene (Regulation (EC) No 183/2005) shows that guidelines and codes of conduct drawn up by industry can make a useful contribution to the practical implementation of legal provisions.
Predpostavlja se, da so smernice koristne tudi na področju označevanja krme.
Presumably guidelines of this kind can also play a useful role in the field of feed labelling.
Vendar pa je treba v zakonodajnem besedilu nedvoumno poudariti, da smernice in kodeksi ne predstavljajo zakonodaje.
However, the legal text must declare unambiguously that these guidelines or codes of conduct do not possess a quasi-legislative character.
Smernice in kodeksi naj bi samo olajšali praktično izvajanje uredbe in po potrebi pojasnili manevrski prostor, predviden v zakonodaji, ne sme pa se jih zlorabiti za prilagajanje zakonsko določenih določb.
They are intended merely to facilitate the practical implementation of the regulation and, if appropriate, to interpret a provision in which the Regulation allows some latitude; however, they may not be misused to dilute legislative provisions.
Onesnažena posamična krmila
Contaminated feed materials
Po izkušnjah prestopniki namenijo precej energije, da se onesnaženih snovi znebijo v obliki krme za živali, zato morajo biti predpisi za onesnažena posamična krmila natančno določeni.
Experience has shown that criminals have devoted considerable energy to disposing of contaminated substances in the form of animal feed; the rules for contaminated feed materials must therefore be formulated very clearly.
Pravno stanje v Skupnosti se je po krizi z dioksinom bistveno izboljšalo s sprejetjem direktive 2002/32/ES.
The Community legal situation was indubitably improved by the adoption of Regulation 2002/32/EC in the wake of the dioxin scandal.
Zlasti v členu 5 zapisana prepoved redčenja je zaustavila nesprejemljivo, vendar takrat zelo razširjeno prakso: mešanje oporečnih delov z neoporečnimi materiali, dokler vrednost ni bila zopet pod mejno vrednostjo.
In particular, Article 5 on dilution banned an unacceptable practice which was widely practised at the time: the mixing of contaminated with uncontaminated material until a value below the limit value was obtained.
Predpisi direktive 2002/32/ES določajo, da se onesnaženih snovi ne sme uporabljati kot krme.
The provisions of Directive 2002/32/EC provide that contaminated materials may not be used as feed.
Vendar pa ni jasno dorečeno, kaj se zgodi s takšnimi snovmi po „umiku iz prometa“.
However, it does not show unequivocally what happens to such materials when they are 'withdrawn from circulation'.
Člen 8 daje državam članicam možnost, da uporabijo določene odobrene postopke razstrupljanja za onesnažena posamična krmila (na primer filtriranje ribjega olja z aktivnim ogljikom z namenom zmanjšanja vsebnosti dioksina ali postopek z amoniakom z namenom razgradnje aflatoksinov).
Article 8 enables Member States to use certain authorised detoxification procedures for contaminated feed materials (for example, active carbon filtration of fish oils to reduce dioxin content and treatment with ammoniac to break down aflatoxins).
Zato Komisija predlaga, da se za onesnaženo krmo ali posamična krmila predpiše jasna oznaka (glej člen 20).
The Commission therefore proposes that the clear labelling of contaminated feed or feed materials be made mandatory (see Article 20).
Vendar je treba poleg predpisov o označevanju zagotoviti tudi, da se onesnažene snovi ne uporabljajo ilegalno in da se upošteva prepoved redčenja.
However, in addition to labelling provisions, efforts must be made to ensure that these contaminated substances are not illegally used and that the dilution prohibition is respected.
Izvedbene določbe (komitologija)
Implementing provisions (comitology)
Sklep Sveta št. 1999/468/ES določa, da se pri osnovnem pravnem aktu, ki je bil sprejet s postopkom soodločanja, ukrepi splošnega obsega za spreminjanje nebistvenih določb tega akta, vključno s črtanjem nekaterih določb ali dodajanjem novih nebistvenih določb, sprejmejo v skladu z regulativnim postopkom s pregledom.
Council Decision No 1999/468/EC lays down that, in the case of a basic legal act adopted by the codecision procedure, measures of general scope designed to amend non-essential provisions of such a legal act, including through the deletion of some of these provisions or the addition of new non-essential provisions, shall be adopted according to the regulatory procedure with scrutiny.
Zato poročevalec predlaga, da se v skladu z regulativnim postopkom s pregledom sprejme tudi določitev mejnih vrednosti nečistoč in pomožnih tehnoloških sredstev (v skladu s členom 6a), smernice za pojasnitev področja uporabe (v skladu s členom 7) ter katalog in kodeksi v skladu s členom 27.
Your rapporteur therefore proposes that the establishment of limit values for impunities and processing aids (pursuant to Article 6a), the adoption of guidelines to clarify the scope (pursuant to Article 7) and the approval of the Catalogue and Codes pursuant to Article 27 should be adopted according to the regulatory procedure with scrutiny.
Vsi ti ukrepi so splošnega obsega in ustrezajo merilom sklepa št. 1999/468/ES za uporabo navedenega postopka (regulativni postopek s pregledom).
All these measures are general in scope and meet the criteria of Decision No 1999/468/EC on the application of the procedure in question (RPS).
Vendar je za razširitev negativnega seznama iz člena 6 primerno uporabiti nujni postopek, da bi Komisija lahko izrekla prepoved za določene materiale v živalskih krmilih s takojšnjim začetkom veljavnosti.
However, it would be appropriate to use the urgency procedure to expand the list of prohibited materials in Article 6 so that the Commission is able to issue bans for certain materials in animal feed with immediate effect.
o predlogu okvirnega sklepa Sveta o evropskem dokaznem nalogu za namene pridobitve predmetov, dokumentov in podatkov za uporabo v kazenskih postopkih
on the proposal for a Council framework decision on the European Evidence Warrant for the purpose of obtaining objects, documents and data for use in proceedings in criminal matters
(Postopek posvetovanja - ponovno posvetovanje)
(Consultation procedure – renewed consultation)
1. ob upoštevanju predloga Sveta 13076/2007,
– having regard to Council draft 13076/2007,
2. ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Svetu ( KOM(2003)0688 ),
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council ( COM(2003)0688 ),
3. ob upoštevanju svojega stališča z dne 31. marca 2004
– having regard to its position of 31 March 2004
UL C 103, 29.4.2004, str.
OJ C 103, 29.4.2004, p.
4. ob upoštevanju člena 34(2)(b) Pogodbe EU,
– having regard to Article 34(2)(b) of the EU Treaty,
5. ob upoštevanju člena 39(1) Pogodbe EU, v skladu s katerim se je Svet posvetoval s Parlamentom ( C6-0293/2008 ),
– having regard to Article 39(1) of the EU Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament ( C6‑0293/2008 ),
6. ob upoštevanju členov 93, 51 in 55(3) svojega poslovnika,
– having regard to Rules 93, 51 and 55(3) of its Rules of Procedure,
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za državljanske svoboščine, pravosodje in notranje zadeve ( A6-0408/2008 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs ( A6‑0408/2008 ),
5. če bi to besedilo ne bilo sprejeto pred začetkom veljavnosti lizbonske pogodbe, je odločen, da bo vsak prihodnji predlog pretehtal po nujnem postopku v tesnem sodelovanju z nacionalnimi parlamenti;
Should that proposal not be adopted prior to the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, is determined to consider any future proposal by urgent procedure, in close cooperation with the national parliaments;
Osnutek Sveta
Council draft
(8) Načelo vzajemnega priznavanja temelji na visoki stopnji zaupanja med državami članicami.
(8) The principle of mutual recognition is based on a high level of confidence between Member States.
Da bi to zaupanje še spodbudili, bi moral ta okvirni sklep vsebovati pomembne zaščitne ukrepe, ki bodo ščitili temeljne pravice.
In order to promote this confidence, this Framework Decision should contain important safeguards to protect fundamental rights.
Zato bi morali biti za odreditev EDN pristojni le sodniki, sodišča, preiskovalni sodniki, javni tožilci in nekateri drugi pravosodni organi, kakor jih v skladu s tem okvirnim sklepom opredelijo države članice .
The EEW should therefore be issued only by judges, courts, investigating magistrates , public prosecutors and certain other judicial authorities as defined by Member States in accordance with this Framework Decision .
Zato bi morali biti za odreditev EDN pristojni le sodniki, preiskovalni sodniki in javni tožilci.
The EEW should therefore be issued only by judges, investigating magistrates and public prosecutors.
Za državljane je eden najpomembnejših zaščitnih ukrepov ta, da dokaze zbirajo pravosodni organi, torej sodniki, preiskovalni sodniki in javni tožilci.
One of the most important guarantees for the public is that evidence should only be collected by the judicial authorities, or in other words judges, investigating magistrates and public prosecutors.
(9) Ta okvirni sklep se sprejema na podlagi člena 31 Pogodbe in se nanaša na pravosodno sodelovanje v okviru navedene določbe, njegov namen pa je pripomoči k zbiranju dokazov za postopke, iz člena 5 tega okvirnega sklepa.
(9) This Framework Decision is adopted under Article 31 of the Treaty and therefore concerns judicial cooperation within the context of that provision, aiming to assist the collection of evidence for proceedings as defined in Article 5 of this Framework Decision.
Čeprav imajo organi, ki niso sodniki, sodišča, preiskovalni sodniki in javni tožilci, lahko določeno vlogo pri zbiranju teh dokazov v skladu s členom 2(c)(ii), pa ta okvirni sklep ne zajema policijskega, carinskega, mejnega in upravnega sodelovanja, ki ga urejajo druge določbe Pogodb.
Although authorities other than judges, courts, investigating magistrates and public prosecutors may have a role in the collection of such evidence in accordance with Article 2(c)(ii), this Framework Decision does not cover police, customs, border and administrative cooperation which are regulated by other provisions of the Treaties.
Ta okvirni sklep ne zajema policijskega, carinskega, mejnega in upravnega sodelovanja, ki ga urejajo druge določbe Pogodb.
This Framework Decision does not cover police, customs, border and administrative cooperation which are regulated by other provisions of the Treaties.
Ta predlog spremembe izhaja iz sprememb, predlaganih v predhodni uvodni izjavi.
This amendment arises from the amendments proposed to the previous recital.
(24a) Najbolj pomembno je čim prej sprejeti okvirni sklep o varstvu osebnih podatkov, ki se obdelujejo v okviru policijskega in pravosodnega sodelovanja v kazenskih zadevah, s katerim bo zagotovljena ustrezna raven varstva podatkov in ki bo vključeval obdelavo osebnih podatkov na nacionalni ravni.
It is of paramount importance to adopt as soon as possible the Framework Decision on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, providing for an adequate level of data protection and including the processing of personal data at national level.
Parlament poziva Svet, naj čim prej sprejme okvirni sklep o varstvu osebnih podatkov, ki se obdelujejo v okviru policijskega in pravosodnega sodelovanja v kazenskih zadevah.
Parliament is calling on the Council to adopt as soon as possible the Framework Decision on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters.
(25) EDN bi moral soobstajati z veljavnimi postopki medsebojne pravne pomoči, vendar je treba takšen sočasni obstoj razumeti kot prehoden, dokler ne bodo, v skladu s haaškim programom, tudi vrste zbiranja dokazov, ki niso vključene v področje uporabe tega okvirnega sklepa, urejene z instrumentom vzajemnega priznavanja, ki bo omogočil celovito ureditev vzajemnega priznavanja in nadomestitev postopkov medsebojne pomoči.
(25) The EEW should coexist with existing mutual assistance procedures, but such coexistence should be considered transitional until, in accordance with the Hague Programme, the types of evidence-gathering excluded from the scope of this Framework Decision are also the subject of a mutual recognition instrument, the adoption of which would provide a complete mutual recognition regime to replace mutual assistance procedures.
(25) EDN bi moral soobstajati z veljavnimi postopki medsebojne pravne pomoči, vendar je treba takšen sočasni obstoj razumeti kot prehoden, dokler ne bodo, v skladu s haaškim programom, tudi vrste zbiranja dokazov, ki niso vključene v področje uporabe tega okvirnega sklepa, urejene z instrumentom vzajemnega priznavanja, ki bo omogočil celovito ureditev vzajemnega priznavanja in nadomestitev postopkov medsebojne pomoči.
(25) The EEW should coexist with existing mutual assistance procedures, but such coexistence should be considered transitional until, in accordance with the Hague Programme, the types of evidence‑gathering excluded from the scope of this Framework Decision are also the subject of a mutual recognition instrument, the adoption of which would provide a complete mutual recognition regime to replace mutual assistance procedures.
Evropska komisija bi morala čim prej predstaviti predloge, ki bodo dopolnili okvir za vzajemno priznavanje dokazov v kazenskih postopkih, in istočasno utrditi že sprejeto zakonodajo.
The European Commission should at the earliest opportunity present proposals aimed at completing the framework for recognition of criminal evidence, while also consolidating the legislation already adopted.
Komisija naj tudi sprejme pobudo za poskus uskladitve sistemov pridobivanja dokazov v državah članicah.
The Commission is also invited to boost efforts to harmonise the system for obtaining evidence in the Member States.
Uskladitev je pravzaprav najboljše izhodišče za zagotavljanje sodelovanja v kazenskih zadevah.
Harmonisation represents the best foundation for cooperation in criminal matters.
Predlog Evropske komisije velja zgolj za že obstoječe in razpoložljive dokaze.
The Commission proposal only targets existing and available evidence.
Da bi pravosodni organi med eno preiskavo lahko uporabljali zgolj en instrument, je treba čim prej dopolniti pravni okvir za pretok dokazov v kazenskih postopkih v Evropski uniji.
The regulatory framework for the circulation of criminal evidence within the European Union should be completed as swiftly as possible so that the judicial authorities only have to use one instrument in the same investigation.
(25a) Evropska komisija mora čim prej pripraviti predlog za pravni instrument v zvezi s postopkovnimi jamstvi v kazenskem postopku.
(25a) The European Commission should at the earliest opportunity present a proposal for a legislative instrument concerning procedural safeguards in criminal proceedings.
Uvedba EDN brez postopkovnih jamstev na evropski ravni lahko povzroči pravno negotovost za obtožene osebe in tretje strani v kazenskih zadevah.
In the absence of any European procedural safeguards, the introduction of the European Evidence Warrant is liable to create legal uncertainty for defendants and third parties involved in criminal cases.
Člen 2 – točka (c)
Article 2 – point c
c) "odreditveni organ " pomeni:
(c) ‘issuing authority’ shall mean:
c) "odreditveni organ " pomeni: sodnika, preiskovalnega sodnika ali javnega tožilca , ki je po nacionalnem pravu pristojen za izdajo EDN ;
(c) ‘issuing authority’ shall mean: a judge, investigating magistrate or public prosecutor competent under national law to issue a European Evidence Warrant;
i) sodnika, sodišče, preiskovalnega sodnika, javnega tožilca ali
(i) a judge, a court, an investigating magistrate, a public prosecutor; or
ii) kateri koli drug pravosodni organ, kakor je opredeljen v državi izdajateljici, ki ima v posebnih primerih pristojnosti preiskovalnega organa v kazenskih postopkih in je v skladu z nacionalno zakonodajo pristojen odrediti pridobitev dokazov v čezmejnih primerih;
(ii) any other judicial authority as defined by the issuing State and, in the specific case, acting in its capacity as an investigating authority in criminal proceedings with competence to order the obtaining of evidence in cross-border cases in accordance with national law;
Kot je poudarjeno v predlogu spremembe k uvodni izjavi 8, je za državljane eden najpomembnejših zaščitnih ukrepov ta, da dokaze zbirajo zgolj pravosodni organi.
As the amendment to recital 8 emphasises, one of most important guarantees for the public is that evidence should only be collected by the judicial authorities.
Člen 4 – odstavek 6
Article 4 - paragraph 6
Če odreditveni organ tako zahteva, lahko EDN, ne glede na odstavek 2, zajema tudi izjave oseb, prisotnih med izvrševanjem EDN, če imajo le te neposredno zvezo s predmetom EDN.
Notwithstanding paragraph 2, the EEW may, if requested by the issuing authority, also cover taking statements from persons present during the execution of the EEW and directly related to the subject of the EEW.
Ustrezni predpisi države izvršiteljice, ki se uporabljajo za nacionalne primere, se uporabljajo tudi za sprejemanje takšnih izjav.
The relevant rules of the executing State applicable to national cases shall also be applicable in respect of the taking of such statements.
Ni objektivnih razlogov za takšno izjemo.
There is no objective reason for this exception.
Člen 7 – odstavek 1 – točka (b a) (novo)
Article 7 – subparagraph 1 – point (b) a (new)