natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Pravilno in hitro izvajanje evropske zakonodaje je sestaven in bistven del strategije za „boljšo pravno ureditev“, ki je bila jedro ponovnega zagona lizbonske strategije za rast in delovna mesta leta 2005.
Correct and swift implementation of European legislation is an integral and essential part of the “Better regulation” strategy, which has been put at the heart of the re-launched Lisbon Agenda for jobs and growth in 2005.
Njen cilj je izboljšati politiko EU s krepitvijo njene preglednosti, skladnosti, učinkovitosti in uspešnosti ter hkrati povečati sodelovanje in odgovornost javnosti v postopku njenega razvoja.
The aim is to improve EU policies by strengthening their transparency, coherence, effectiveness and efficiency, while at the same time boosting public participation and accountability in the process of their development.
Prizadevanje za izboljšanje zakonodajnega okolja bo prineslo pričakovane rezultate le, če se bodo evropski predpisi uporabljali pravilno in učinkovito.
Efforts to improve the regulatory environment will only produce the expected results if European regulations are applied correctly and effectively.
Za sedanji pristop k spremljanju izvajanja je še vedno prepogosto značilna ozka usmeritev v formalen pravni prenos.
The current approach to monitoring implementation is still too often characterised by a narrow focus on formal legal transposition.
Namesto tega morajo institucije EU uporabljati stalen praktičen pristop k izvajanju na različnih stopnjah postopka, v katerem se nameni zakonodajalcev EU spreminjajo v prakso za evropske državljane.
What is needed instead is a continuous hands-on approach to implementation by EU institutions throughout the various stages of the process of translating the intentions of the EU legislators into practical effects for European citizens.
Zato nov koncept dinamičnega prenosa pomeni, da mora spremljanje izvajanja potekati v daljšem obdobju ter ne sme biti enkratno in rutinsko, kot se prepogosto dogaja.
Thus, a new concept of dynamic transposition implies that the monitoring of implementation needs to be done over a longer period of time and not just as a mere one-off box-ticking exercise, as is too often the case.
Še pomembneje je spoštovati prvotno voljo in namen zakonodajalca.
More importantly, the original will and intention of the legislator must be respected.
Dejansko je treba cilj zagotavljanja učinkovitega izvajanja upoštevati že na ravni priprave osnutka in sprejetja zakonodaje.
In fact, the objective of ensuring effective implementation should be taken into account as early as the stages of drafting and adopting legislation.
To je bilo priznano v agendi za boljšo pravno ureditev, vendar je potrebno stalno prizadevanje za zagotovitev, da postane izvajanje zakonodaje EU jasnejše in preprostejše.
This has been recognised by the 'better regulation agenda' but continuous efforts are needed to ensure that EU legislation becomes clearer and simpler to implement.
Težave pri prenosu in izvajanju so pogosto posledica slabo osnovanih zakonodajnih besedil.
Problems of transposition and implementation often result from poorly drafted legislative texts.
Zato imajo evropski zakonodajni organi veliko odgovornost v zvezi s tem in bi se torej morali pri pogajanjih izogibati zapletenim in nejasnim kompromisom.
Thus, European legislative authorities have an important responsibility in this regard and should therefore avoid complicated and unclear compromises in negotiations.
Dvoumnosti v besedilu pri prenosu v nacionalno zakonodajo na primer ustvarijo pravno negotovost in neskladnosti, kar lahko povzroči izkrivljanje konkurence in drobitev notranjega trga.
For example, textual ambiguities generate legal uncertainties and discrepancies when texts are transposed into national law, with the potential for distortion of competition and fragmentation of the internal market.
Zato bi bilo zaželeno, da na ravni priprave osnutka vsi organi Skupnosti, ki sodelujejo v postopku priprave zakonodaje, upoštevajo morebitne težave z uporabo zakonodaje EU s povečanjem prizadevanja za oceno predvidljivih težav, ki se lahko pojavijo.
It would therefore be desirable that all the community bodies involved in the lawmaking process take into account the potential difficulties of application of EU law at the drafting stage, by putting more effort into assessing foreseeable difficulties which may arise.
Poleg tega je pomembno, da se pri sprejemanju zakonodaje EU od držav članic zahteva, da zagotovijo tako imenovane korelacijske tabele, ki prikazujejo način prenosa posamezne določbe v nacionalno zakonodajo.
Furthermore, when adopting EU legislation, it is important for Member States to be required to provide so-called correspondence tables, indicating how each of the provisions is transposed into national legislation.
Komisija zdaj načeloma vključi v svoje predloge zahtevo po korelacijskih tabelah.
The Commission now makes it a point of principle to include in its proposals a request for correspondence tables.
Vendar so na žalost v treh četrtinah primerov te tabele odpravljene med zakonodajnim postopkom.
However, they are, regrettably, eliminated in the course of the legislative procedure in three-quarters of all cases.
Veliko držav članic verjetno meni, da so te korelacijske tabele obremenjujoče in zato želijo iz predloga odstraniti določbo, kar jim v veliko primerih uspe.
It is probable that many Member States find these correlation tables burdensome and therefore seek to remove the provision from the proposal, and in many cases they are successful.
Zato mora Evropski parlament zagotoviti dosledno podporo zahtevi po korelacijskih tabelah v novi zakonodaji.
It is therefore necessary for the European Parliament to ensure consistent support for the insistence on correspondence tables in new legislation.
Po sprejetju zakonodaje EU je treba dejavno povečati prizadevanje za zagotavljanje pomoči državam članicam pri prenosu v nacionalno zakonodajo, na primer z redno objavo obrazložitvenih sporočil in navodil.
Once EU legislation is adopted, increased efforts must be made proactively to assist the Member States in transposing it into national law, for instance through the regular publication of interpretative communications and guidance texts.
Poleg tega je treba delavnice in seminarje o prenosu uporabljati bolj sistematično, saj organom držav članic omogočajo izmenjavo stališč in razpravo o pravilnem prenosu ključnih določb in zahtev v direktivah EU ter tako prispevajo k enotnejši razlagi v EU.
In addition, transposition workshops and seminars should be used more systematically because they allow the authorities of Member States to exchange their views and discuss the correct transposition of key provision and requirements contained in EU directives and may thereby contribute to a more uniform implementation throughout the EU.
Zato mora Komisija pri spremljanju prenosa preveriti, ali so bile določbe EU formalno prenesene, več pozornosti pa mora nameniti tudi ocenjevanju kakovosti izvedbenih ukrepov, ker je veliko primerov nepravilnega izvajanja posledica slabe kakovosti nacionalne zakonodaje, ki včasih izraža namerno prizadevanje držav članic za oslabitev zakonodaje EU iz političnih, upravnih in gospodarskih razlogov.
Subsequently, in monitoring transposition, the Commission should not only check whether the EU provisions have been transposed formally but also pay more attention to evaluating the quality of the implementing measures, since many cases of incorrect implementation are the result of poor quality national legislation, which sometimes reflects Member States' deliberate efforts to undermine EU legislation for political, administrative and economic reasons.
Poleg tega se direktive pogosto prenesejo na razdrobljen način, tj. ne prenesejo se v en nacionalni zakon, ampak se porazdelijo med različne akte na različnih ravneh pravne hierarhije.
In addition, directives are often transposed in a fragmented way, i.e. not into one single national law but spread throughout different acts of varying levels in the legal hierarchy.
Jasno je, da tak način prenosa, čeprav je zakonit, ni koristen za spremljanje izvajanja ali za preglednost.
It is clear that this way of transposing, though legally legitimate, is not helpful either for monitoring implementation or for transparency's sake.
V zvezi s tem je pomembno navesti komisarja McCreevyja (H8): „ Vendar če sem popolnoma odkrit, moraš biti pri nekaterih prenosih genij, da najdeš izvirno direktivo EU v določeni izvedbeni zakonodaji, ker je to kot iskanje igle v senu.
In this context, it is worth quoting Commissioner McCreevy (H8): " However, to be brutally honest, for some of the transpositions, you would have to be an absolute genius to find the needle in the haystack of the particular implementing legislation as to where the original EU directive is."
“ Ta vprašanja je treba obravnavati, ko Komisija oceni kakovost prenosa.
These issues must be addressed when the Commission assesses the quality of transposition.
Vendar je najpomembnejše bolj sistematično in dejavnejše ocenjevanje, kako se zakonodaja EU uporablja v praksi.
Most importantly, however, there has to be a more systematic and proactive assessment of how EU legislation is being applied in practice.
Najprej mora oceniti, ali je dejanska uporaba v skladu z zahtevami EU, in šele nato, ali doseženi rezultati ustrezajo prvotno zastavljenim ciljem.
It should first assess whether the application in practice complies with the EU requirements and secondly evaluate whether the results achieved correspond to the objectives originally pursued.
Komisija mora Evropskemu parlamentu redno poročati o svojih ugotovitvah.
The Commission should regularly report its findings to the European Parliament.
Če se ugotovi, da cilji niso bili izpolnjeni, je treba razmisliti o zakonodajnih spremembah.
If it is found that the objectives were not met, legislative amendments should be considered.
Nujno je treba pospešiti tudi postopke za ugotavljanje kršitev.
There is also an urgent need to speed up infringement procedures.
Ko se Komisija odloča o sprožitvi ali nadaljevanju postopka za ugotavljanje kršitev, organizira štiri srečanja na leto, vse odločitve (od prvega uradnega opomina, do odločitve, da se zadeva predloži Sodišču) pa sprejme kolegij komisarjev.
When deciding on opening or following-up infringement procedures, the Commission currently organises four meetings a year and all decisions (from the first letter of formal notice to the decision to seize the Court of Justice) are taken by the College of Commissioners.
Evropski parlament je v resoluciji z dne 16. maja 2006
In its resolution of 16 May 2006
Resolucija EP o 21. in 22. letnem poročilu Komisije o nadzoru uporabe zakonodaje Skupnosti (2003–2004) – P6_TA(2006)0202 . zahteval, „ da se pozorno oceni možnost skrajšanja notranjega postopka v začetni fazi s pooblastitvijo vsakega člana Komisije, da v okviru svojih pristojnosti državam članicam pošlje uradne opomine (kar je že praksa v primerih, ko države članice prava Skupnosti niso prenesle v nacionalno zakonodajo v določenem roku) .
EP resolution on the Commission's 21st and 22nd Annual reports on monitoring the application of Community law (2003-2004) - P6_TA(2006)0202 . the European Parliament requested that " careful thought be given to the possibility of the internal procedures being shortened in the initial stage of proceedings by authorising each Member of the Commission to send letters of formal notice to the Member States within the field of his/her responsibility (as is already the practice in cases where a Member State has not transposed Community law into its national legislation within the set deadline) .
EP je v zvezi s potrebo po hitrem in ciljno usmerjenem ukrepanju na ključnih področjih v drugi resoluciji zahteval
"Referring to the need for swift and targeted action in key areas, the EP requested in another resolution
Resolucija EP o izvajanju, posledicah in vplivu veljavne zakonodaje notranjega trga ( P6_TA(2006)0204 ). , da Komisija „ vzpostavi pregleden in hiter postopek za primere preverjanja kršitev na notranjem trgu in da obvesti Parlament o tem, kako so v praksi prednostna merila za obravnavanje kršitev pregledana in predstavljena pritožnikom ..., “
EP resolution on the implementation, consequences and impact of the internal market legislation in force - P6_TA(2006)0204 . that the Commission " establish a transparent fast-track infringement procedure for internal market test cases and that it inform Parliament on how its priority criteria for infringement handling ... are in practice screened and brought to the attention of complainants "
Pomen izvajanja se lahko dodatno poudari z določitvijo komisarja, ki bi bil neposredno odgovoren za prenos in uporabo zakonodaje ES ter bi mu pomagala posebna delovna skupina za prenos in uporabo znotraj Komisije.
The importance of implementation might be further underlined by the creation of a Commissioner directly responsible for the transposition and application of EC law, assisted by a dedicated task-force for Transposition and Application' inside the Commission.
Če je Komisija zares pripravljena izboljšati svojo učinkovitost pri tem ključnem vprašanju, bi bilo imenovanje komisarja, posebej odgovornega za to nalogo, jasno politično sporočilo ter bi pomagalo pri usklajevanju prizadevanj različnih generalnih direktoratov in generalnega sekretariata ES, ki zdaj potekajo ločeno in na različnih ravneh.
If the Commission is really committed to upgrading its performance in this key issue, the designation of a Commissioner specifically responsible for this task would send not only a clear political message but also help to coordinate all the efforts which are currently undertaken separately and to varying degrees by the different Directorates General and the General Secretariat of the EC.
Komisar bi v okviru svoje odgovornosti združil vse horizontalne oddelke, ki obravnavajo izvajanje, in bi bil odgovoren za usklajevanje drugih vertikalnih enot v vseh generalnih direktoratih.
This Commissioner would group under his responsibility all horizontal departments dealing with implementation and be responsible for the coordination of the other vertical units in all Directorates-General.
Parlament je že predlagal, da države članice „ imenujejo politične osebnosti na nacionalni ravni, odgovorne za politiko ugotavljanja kršitev, “
Parliament has already suggested that Member States also " appoint political figures responsible at national level for infringement policy"
Resolucija EP P6_TA(2006)0202 , odst.
EP resolution P6_TA(2006)0202 , par.
16. in je pozval Komisijo, naj od držav članic zahteva „ retroaktivno uporabo predpisov Skupnosti, ki so bili kršeni, da bi tako odpravili vse posledice kršitev, ter da naj se v primeru vztrajnega neizpolnjevanja obveznosti nemudoma zateče k členu 228 Pogodbe o ES .“
16. and called on the Commission to ask Member States "to guarantee retroactive application of the Community provisions which have been infringed, in order to remove all effects of the infringement, with an immediate recourse to Article 228 of the EC Treaty in the event of persistent failure to comply ."
Evropski parlament in nacionalni parlamenti morajo biti bolj vključeni v spremljanje izvajanja zakonodaje Skupnosti ter pri tem dejavneje sodelovati.
There should be increased involvement and participation of both the European Parliament and the national parliaments in the process of monitoring implementation of Community Law.
Zmanjšanje količine evropske zakonodaje mora spremljati večje poudarjanje njenega izvajanja.
A reduction in the amount of European legislation must be accompanied by more emphasis on its implementation.
Evropski parlament mora imeti v zvezi s tem vodilno vlogo, pri tem pa se ne sme vmešavati v pristojnosti in naloge, ki jih ima Komisija v skladu s pogodbami.
The European Parliament should be at the forefront in this respect but without interfering with the competences and duties entrusted to the Commission by the Treaties.
Komisija in Parlament morata vzpostaviti stalne načine sporazumevanja in strukturiran dialog o vprašanjih izvajanja.
The Commission and Parliament should create permanent channels of communication and establish a structured dialogue on implementation issues.
To mora potekati na najvišji politični ravni in se mora spremljati v sodelovanju z raznimi pristojnimi organi v Parlamentu.
This has to be done at the highest political level and be followed-up through the involvement of the various competent bodies within Parliament.
Sodelovanje teh dveh institucij je najpomembnejše, čeprav ima Komisija kot varuh pogodb glavno odgovornost za izvajanje.
The collaboration of these two institutions is of paramount importance although the main responsibility for implementation rests with the Commission as guardian of the Treaties.
Letno poročilo o izvajanju zakonodaje Skupnosti mora postati razvijajoče se orodje Parlamenta, ki ga stalno spremljajo parlamentarni odbori.
The annual report on implementation of Community Law should become an in progress tool for Parliament, permanently monitored by the parliamentary committees.
Namesto da je nespremenljiv letni dokument, ga morajo odbori uporabljati kot instrument za nadziranje ukrepov ES na področju izvajanja.
Rather than being a static annual document, it should be an instrument for committees to supervise EC actions in the field of implementation.
Odbor za pravne zadeve, ki je odgovoren za boljše sprejemanje zakonodaje, mora imeti pomembno vlogo pri usklajevanju ter povezovanju z ustreznimi službami Komisije in vodilnimi strukturami Parlamenta, kot sta predsedstvo in konferenca predsednikov.
The committee responsible for better law-making, the Committee on Legal Affairs, should play an important role in coordinating and liaising with the relevant services in the Commission and with the leadership structures of Parliament, such as the Presidency and the Conference of Presidents.
Strokovna komunikacija med Komisijo in parlamentarnimi odbori na tem področju mora biti stalna in strukturirana.
The specialised communication between the Commission and parliamentary committees in the area should be permanent and structured.
Parlament mora prilagoditi svoje postopke, da bo imel dejavnejšo vlogo pri spremljanju izvajanja zakonodaje v državah članicah.
Parliament should adjust its procedures with a view to playing a more active role in monitoring the implementation of legislation in the Member States.
Organi odločanja Parlamenta morajo resno razmisliti o tem, da bi se v odborih vzpostavili stalni poročevalci o izvajanju ali delovne skupine, odgovorne za spremljanje izvajanja ključne zakonodaje, ki jo sprejme posamezen odbor.
Serious consideration should be given by the decision-making bodies of Parliament to the establishment, within the committees, of permanent rapporteurs on implementation or task-forces responsible for following up on the implementation of key legislation adopted by each committee.
Pristojni poročevalec mora imeti sam ali ob pomoči navedenih stalnih struktur dejavno vlogo na tem področju.
The competent rapporteur should, alone or with the help of the above mention permanent structures, play an active role in this area.
Razmisliti je treba tudi, ali je treba spremeniti poslovnik, da se zagotovi dejavnejša vloga Parlamenta pri nadziranju izvajanja.
Consideration should also be given to whether the Rules of Procedure need to be amended with a view to providing for a more active role for Parliament in overseeing implementation.
Pomembno vlogo morajo imeti tudi nacionalni parlamenti.
The national parliaments should also play an important role.
Sodelovanje nacionalnih zakonodajnih organov na področju evropskih zadev se je v zadnjih nekaj letih močno povečalo, kar se bo nadaljevalo še naprej.
The involvement of national legislative bodies in the field of European affairs has increased substantially over the last few years and will continue to do so in the future.
Na tem področju je treba razviti mehanizme za zagotovitev dejavnega sodelovanja nacionalnih parlamentov (in regionalnih parlamentov z zakonodajno pristojnostjo) pri spremljanju zakonodaje Skupnosti.
In this area, mechanisms should be developed in order to secure the active participation of national parliaments (and regional parliaments that have legislative powers) in the monitoring of community legislation.
Zakonodajni organi v državah članicah se ukvarjajo zlasti z vprašanjem izvajanja in morajo biti zato pripravljeni, da tesneje sodelujejo z Evropskim parlamentom.
Legislative bodies in Member States are particularly concerned with the implementation issue and should therefore be willing to enhance cooperation with the European Parliament.
Strukture sodelovanja do neke stopnje že obstajajo in zagotoviti je treba, da se lahko uporabijo za ta namen.
To a certain degree, the structures for collaboration already exist and it should be possible to use them for this purpose.
Kot je bilo že navedeno, imajo države članice pri prenosu zakonodaje EU v nacionalno zakonodajo določeno stopnjo prilagodljivosti.
As has been stated previously, Member States have a degree of flexibility in transposing EU legislation into national law.
Direktive po svoji naravi državam članicam omogočajo svobodno izbiro oblike in metode izvajanja.
Directives, by their very nature, leave Member States discretion in choosing the form and method of implementation.
Zato jih je preprosto vključiti v različne nacionalne pravne sisteme, upravne ureditve in tradicije.
Thus directives are easily integrated into diverging national legal systems, administrative arrangements and traditions.
Vendar se lahko hkrati zaradi različne nacionalne mentalitete in tradicije direktiva uporablja drugače in je zato raven učinkovitosti drugačna.
However, at the same time, these different national mentalities and traditions may lead to differing application of the Directive and thus varying degrees of effectiveness.
To ni sprejemljivo na občutljivih področjih, kot so vzajemno priznavanje finančnih storitev, na katerih stranke pričakujejo enotne standarde nadzora v celotni EU.
This is unacceptable in sensitive areas such as mutual recognition of financial services, where consumers expect uniform standards of supervision across the EU.
Poleg tega se lahko učinkovitost direktiv zmanjša s prenosom v nacionalno zakonodajo zaradi navedenih težav (tj. jezikovne težave, razpršen prenos), ali ker se države članice morda namerno odločijo, da jih bodo prenesle tako, da bodo manj učinkovite.
Moreover, directives may loose their effectiveness as a result of their transposition into national law, as a result of the problems referred to above (e.g. linguistic difficulties, fragmented transposition), or because Member States may deliberately choose to transpose them in a way that undermines their effectiveness.
Zato je treba priporočiti, da se kot standardna pravna oblika za sprejemanje zakonodaje o precej občutljivih vprašanjih izberejo uredbe in ne direktive, da se bolje doseže cilj zakonodajalca.
It is therefore to be recommended that regulations and not directives be chosen as the standard legal form to legislate on particularly sensitive issues, in order to reflect the legislator's aims more closely.
Če pa se namesto uredbe izbere direktiva, bi bilo priporočljivo, da vsebuje zahteve po čim večji usklajenosti in ne najnižjih standardov.
If, however, a directive is chosen rather than a regulation, it would be advisable for it to contain maximum harmonization requirements and not minimum standards.
Direktive morajo določiti jasne in nedvoumne zahteve, ki ne dovoljujejo različnih razlag in omejujejo svobodo državnih organov.
Directives should lay down clear and unambiguous requirements, which leave no room for interpretation and limit the discretion of national authorities.
Kadar je le mogoče, se je treba izogibati klavzulam o odstopanju in neobveznim zahtevam, ker zmanjšujejo skladnost in učinkovitost zakonodaje v EU.
Derogation clauses and optional requirements should be avoided wherever possible because they diminish the EU-wide coherence and effectiveness of the law.