natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Uradnik za informiranje določi, katere informacije so primerne za javnost v zvezi z:
The Information Officer shall determine which information it is expedient to give the public concerning:
(a) izvajanjem te uredbe,
a) the implementation of this Regulation;
(b) dobro prakso
b) good practice
in poskrbi za razširjanje teh informacij v primerni obliki in na primeren način.
and shall ensure the dissemination of that information in an appropriate form and manner.
Uradnik za informiranje oceni, če storitve v generalnem direktoratu, za katerega je pristojen, sledijo načelom dobre prakse.
The Information Officer shall assess whether the services within his or her directorate-general follow good practice.
Uradnik za informiranje lahko osebo, ki zaprosi za informacijo, preusmeri na drug direktorat, če želena informacija presega njegova pooblastila, a je v pristojnosti drugega direktorata iste institucije, če seveda s takšnimi informacijami razpolaga.
The Information Officer may redirect the person who requires the information to another directorate if the information in question falls outside its remit and within the remit of a different directorate within the same institution, provided that he or she is in possession of such information.
Po potrebi se lahko uradnik za informiranje z evropskim varuhom človekovih pravic posvetuje o pravilnem in ustreznem izvajanju te uredbe.
When needed, the Information Officer may consult the European Ombudsman in relation to the proper and sound implementation of this Regulation.
Za vsako neizpolnjevanje obveznosti po tej uredbi, bodisi namerno ali iz malomarnosti, je uradnik ali drug uslužbenec institucij disciplinsko odgovoren skladno s pravili in postopki, določenimi v Kadrovskih predpisih za uradnike Evropskih skupnosti ali v pogojih za zaposlitev, ki se uporabljajo za druge uslužbence Evropskih skupnosti, in v notranjih pravilih institucij.
Any failure to comply with the obligations under this Regulation, whether intentionally or through negligence on his or her part, shall make an official or other servant of the institutions liable to disciplinary action, in accordance with the rules and procedures laid down in the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities and the Conditions of Employment of other servants of the European Communities and in the institutions' internal rules.
Upravna praksa v institucijah
Administrative practice in the institutions
Upravna praksa glede preglednosti v institucijah
Administrative transparency practice in the institutions
Institucije organizirajo in vzdržujejo informacije, ki jih imajo, tako, da je javnosti lahko brez dodatnih naporov omogočen dostop do informacij.
The institutions shall organise and maintain the information in their possession in such a way that the public may be granted access to the information without additional effort.
Predlog spremembe člena 15(1) temelji na pravici do dobrega upravljanja iz člena 41 Listine o temeljnih pravicah in ustreza denimo zakonodaji na Finskem.
The amendment to Article 15 (1) is based on the right to good administration laid down in Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and corresponds to the legislation, for instance, in Finland.
Pomenil bi tudi korak v smeri pravega zakona o prostem dostopu do informacij EU, hkrati pa bi služil cilju iz nove uvodne izjave 18, in sicer da bi razvoj informacijske tehnologije moral olajšati izvrševanje pravice do dostopa, ne pa zmanjšati obsega informacij, ki so na voljo javnosti.
It also would mean a step in the direction of a genuine freedom of information act of the EU, while serving, simultaneously, the objective set out in the new recital 18, that the development of information technology should make it easier to exercise the right of access and not reduce the amount of information available to the public.
Da bi zagotovile uspešno izvajanje načel preglednosti in dobrega upravljanja, se zadevne institucije dogovorijo o skupnih izvedbenih pravilih in postopkih za oblikovanje, določanje stopnje tajnosti, evidentiranje in razširjanje dokumentov.
In order to ensure that the principles of transparency and good administration are effectively applied, the institutions concerned shall agree on common implementing rules and procedures for the presentation, classification, declassification, registration and dissemination of documents.
Da bi spodbudile resnično razpravo med udeleženci v postopku sprejemanja odločitev, in brez vpliva na načelo preglednosti, institucije jasno obvestijo državljane, če in kdaj med konkretnimi fazami postopka sprejemanja odločitev neposrednega dostopa do dokumentov ni mogoče dovoliti.
In order to facilitate a genuine debate among the players involved in the decision-making process and without prejudice to the principle of transparency, the institutions shall make clear to citizens if and when, during the specific phases of the decision-making process, direct access to documents may not be granted.
Te omejitve veljajo le do sprejetja omenjene odločitve.
These limitations shall not apply once that decision has been taken.
Člen 15 – odstavek 1 b (novo)
Article 15 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Institucije državljane pošteno in pregledno obvestijo o svoji organizacijski shemi in navedejo pristojnosti svojih notranjih enot, notranji potek dela in približne roke za postopke, ki so v njihovi pristojnosti, ter na katere službe se lahko državljani obrnejo, da bi pridobili podporo, informacije ali upravno varstvo.
The institutions shall inform citizens, in a fair and transparent way, about their organisational chart by indicating the remit of their internal units, the internal workflow and indicative deadlines of the procedures falling within their remit, to which services may citizens refer to obtain support, information or administrative redress.
Institucije ustanovijo medinstitucionalni odbor iz člena 255 , da preuči in izmenja najboljšo prakso, opredeli ovire pri dostopu in uporabi ter neobjavljene vire podatkov, obravnava možne spore , spodbuja interoperabilnost, ponovno uporabo in združitev registrov, standardizira kodo dokumentov prek evropske organizacije za standardizacijo, vzpostavi enoten portal EU za zagotovitev dostopa do vseh dokumentov EU in razpravlja o prihodnjem razvoju dostopa javnosti do dokumentov.
The institutions shall establish an interinstitutional Article 255 committee to examine and exchange best practice, identify access and usability barriers and unpublished data sources, address possible conflicts , promote interoperability, re-use and merger of registers, standardise document coding through a European standards organisation, creat e a single EU portal to ensure access to all EU documents and discuss future developments on public access to documents.
Ta uredba ne posega v obstoječe predpise o avtorskih pravicah, ki lahko omejijo pravico tretje stranke do pridobivanja kopij dokumentov ali razmnoževanja ali izkoriščanja objavljenih dokumentov.
This Regulation shall be without prejudice to any existing rules on copyright which may limit a third party's right to obtain copies of documents or to reproduce or exploit released documents.
Sedanji zapis člena 16 je boljši kot spremembe, ki jih je predlagala Komisija.
The current wording of Article 16 is better than the changes proposed by the Commission.
Komisija najpozneje do … objavi poročilo o izvajanju načel te uredbe in oblikuje priporočila, po potrebi s predlogi za revizijo uredbe, ki bodo potrebni zaradi novih razmer, in z akcijskim programom ukrepov, ki naj bi jih sprejele institucije.
At the latest by ...., the Commission shall publish a report on the application of the principles of this Regulation and shall make recommendations including, if appropriate, proposals for the revision of this Regulation which are necessitated by changes in the current situation and an action programme of measures to be taken by the institutions.
Kot je določeno v sedanji uredbi, bi bilo treba predložiti poročilo o izvajanju uredbe, v katerem bi morali biti po potrebi navedeni priporočila in predlogi za izboljšave.
As was the case with the current Regulation a report on the implementation of the Regulation should be presented in which recommendations and proposals for improvements, where needed, should be made.
Izključitev katere od določb dejansko pomeni spremembo uredbe.
The exclusion of a provision signifies a de facto amendment to the Regulation.
Kot poročevalec za predlog revizije uredbe 1049/2001 sem predlagal kar nekaj bistvenih sprememb predloga Evropske komisije, predstavljenega 30. aprila 2008.
As rapporteur on the proposal for revision of Regulation 1049/2001, I have put forward some crucial modifications to the European Commission's proposal presented on 30 April 2008.
Ko je leta 2001 začela veljati sedanja uredba, sem bil prav tako poročevalec za to zadevo.
When the current regulation came into force in 2001, I was also rapporteur in charge of this dossier.
Moja pričakovanja glede tega, kako izboljšati standarde o dostopu javnosti do dokumentov EU, so bila zaradi zgoraj naštetega tedaj, ko je Komisija leta 2008 predstavila svoj predlog revizije, zelo visoka.
In this perspective, when the Commission presented its proposal for revision in 2008, my expectations were very high as how the standards on public access to EU documents could be improved.
Vendar kljub nekaterim pozitivnim – in povsem upravičenim – spremembam v predlogu, kot je širši krog upravičencev do dostopa po tej uredbi in skladnost z Aarhuško konvencijo, so nekatere druge po mojem mnenju korak nazaj glede preglednosti, zlasti če pomislimo, da večina zahtev Evropskega parlamenta iz leta 2006 ni bila upoštevana.
However, despite some positive modifications inserted in the proposal which are clearly justifiable like the extension of the beneficiaries of this regulations and the conformity with the Aarhus Convention, others would, in my view, represent a step backwards for transparency, especially if we consider that most of the European Parliament requests of 2006 have not been taken into account.
Menim, da moramo kot zakonodajalci izkoristiti to priložnost za revizijo uredbe 1049/2001 in jo zastaviti kot resnični in edini pravni okvir za dostopanje javnosti do dokumentov in informacij, ki jih obravnavajo institucije in organi EU, saj se moramo zavedati, da so končni uporabniki državljani.
In my view, we the legislators must take this opportunity for the revision of Regulation 1049/2001, to try to make this regulation the real and unique legal framework on public accessibility as regards all documents and information handled by EU institutions and bodies bearing in mind that final users are the citizens.
Naša naloga in dolžnost je, da zagotovimo kar najlažji in uporabniku prijazen dostop.
It is our duty and obligation to make access as easy and user-friendly as possible.
Poleg tega je prav, da izkoristimo to priložnost in različne določbe uredimo bolj dosledno in razumno, da bodo institucije končno lahko skupaj opredelile skupna pravila in smernice za ravnanje z različnimi vrstami dokumentov.
Furthermore, we need to take this opportunity to try to order the different provisions in a more consistent and reasonable way so that Institutions can finally work together to define common rules and guidelines to handle different kind of documents.
Ne začenjamo iz nič, ker obstaja že kar nekaj pobud na ravni mehkega prava, ki sledijo istemu cilju.
We do not start from scratch because there are a lot of initiatives which already exist, on a soft law basis, try to reach the same objective.
K cilju razumljivejšega postopka odločanja na evropski ravni težijo tudi sredstva, kot so Uradni list, sistem Celex ali različni medinstitucionalni sporazumi o kodifikaciji in pripravi zakonodaje.
Tools like the Official Journal, the Celex system or the several interinstitutional agreements on codification, legislative drafting are aiming at the same objective to make the European Decision-making process more understandable.
Ko govorim o evropskem postopku sprejemanja odločitev, menim, da bi ga bilo treba razširiti na nacionalne izvedbene ukrepe, saj gre za besedila, ki dejansko vplivajo na evropske državljane.
When I refer to European decision-making process, I consider that it should be extended also to the National implementing measures as these are the real texts that affect European citizens.
Moj pristop je veliko bolj ambiciozen od predloga Komisije, verjetno pa tudi od pripravljenosti Sveta.
My approach will be much more ambitious than the Commission proposal and probably of the Council willingness.
S poročilom skušam našo skupno izkušnjo dopolniti tako, da bi si med institucijami kar najbolj porazdelili dolžnosti in pristojnosti po pogodbah.
My report intends to build on our common experience by sharing as much as possible, in an interinstitutional perspective, our duties and remits according to the treaties.
Zaradi tega skušam zapolniti vrzel, ki zeva pri skupnih pravilih o "tajnih podatkih" (tako imenovani občutljivi dokumenti, ki jih navaja sedanja uredba 1049/2001), in na raven uredbe povzdigniti nekaj dobrih načel iz notranjih varnostnih pravil Sveta in Komisije, če se seveda ta načela lahko uporabijo za parlamentarna telesa.
In this perspective, I try to complete the lack of common rules on "classified information" (the so-called sensitive documents cited in the current regulation 1049/2001) by taking at regulation level some good principles taken by the internal security rules of the Council and Commission as far as these principles can be also applicable to a Parliamentary body.
Drugi izziv je bil, kako razlikovati med zakonodajno in upravno preglednostjo in kako ob tej priliki opredeliti nekatera načela preglednosti in dobrega upravljanja, predvidena v členu 41 listine EU o temeljnih pravicah.
A second challenge has been to make a difference between legislative and administrative transparency by grasping this occasion for detailing some principles of transparent and good administration as foreseen by article 41 of the EU Charter of Fundamental rights.
Iz istega razloga bi bilo prav, da damo večjo moč neodvisnim organom, denimo evropskemu varuhu človekovih pravic in evropskemu nadzorniku za varstvo podatkov, ki bi lahko institucijam pomagali pri reformi njihovih notranjih postopkov.
By the same token, we should empower independent bodies such as the European Ombudsman and the EDPS to help the institutions in the accomplishment of the reform of their internal procedure.
Ker imajo institucije že svoje uradne osebe za varstvo podatkov, je glede na cilj uredbe prav, da se v vsaki organizacijski enoti, npr. generalnih direktoratih, imenuje uradnik za informiranje, ki bi lahko nastopal v vlogi sogovornika za državljane, pa tudi za druge upravne enote, ki obravnavajo dokumente institucij.
As the institutions already have data protection officers it is consistent with the aim of the regulation to appoint in each organisational unit, such as general directorates, an information officer who could be the interlocutor for citizens as well as the other administrative units dealing with institutions documents.
Preglednost ni zgolj prilastek, ampak načelo, na katerem bi morali graditi vsi postopki v institucijah.
Transparency is not just an attribute but a principle to which all the institutions procedures should be designed upon.
Dolžnosti uradnikov glede priprave, evidentiranja, pogajanj, določanja stopnje tajnosti in arhiviranja dokumentov EU bi morale biti sorazmerne z varovanjem učinkovitosti in preglednosti institucij EU.
The impact on the officials' duties to draft, register, negotiate, classify and archive EU documents should be aligned by protecting at the same time the efficiency and transparency of the EU institutions.
Kar najhitreje se moramo odzvati na zahteve evropskih državljanov, pa tudi nacionalnih ustanov in regionalnih organov, v prvi vrsti nacionalnih parlamentov, in ne pozabiti na dolgo pričakovano ratifikacijo lizbonske pogodbe.
We need to respond as soon as possible to increasing demands from the European citizens but also from National institutions and regional authorities, primarily the national parliaments, bearing in mind the long waited ratification of the Lisbon Treaty.
Razumni rok za Parlament bi bil, da prvo obravnavo zaključi v začetku marca, zaprosi Komisijo za spremembo predloga in se pogaja za možno skupno stališče s Svetom v času švedskega predsedovanja.
A reasonable agenda could be for the Parliament to adopt its first reading beginning of March, asking the Commission to modify its proposal and negotiate a possible common position with the Council under the Swedish presidency.
Če bi se v tem času izkazalo, da bi lizbonska pogodba lahko začela veljati, bo precej enostavno graditi na že opravljenem delu in dopolniti novo besedilo, ki bi bilo zaključeno takoj po začetku veljavnosti lizbonske pogodbe (kot se je zgodilo z uredbo Olaf takoj po začetku veljavnosti maastrichtske pogodbe).
Should in the meantime it becomes clear that the Lisbon Treaty could come into force, it will be rather easy to build on the work already done, and update a new text which could be finalised immediately after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty itself (as it was the case for the Olaf Regulation immediately after the entry into force of the Maastricht Treaty).
Predlagam spremembe v zvezi z naslednjimi točkami:
I have decided to put forward a series of amendments which will touch upon:
· Vnesel sem ločevanje med upravičenci do dostopa in področjem uporabe.
· The separation of the beneficiaries from the scope of this regulation.
Za specifična sredstva za omogočanje dostopa do teh podatkov poskrbijo institucije same.
Specific tools to make this information available shall be foreseen by the institutions.
· Pripisal sem tudi nove opredelitve tajnih, zakonodajnih in upravnih dokumentov, arhiva in zgodovinskega arhiva.
· I have also inserted new definitions on classified, legislative, and administrative documents, archive and historical archives.
· Spremenil sem člen o izjemah, ker sem želel vzpostaviti razliko med varovanjem javnih in zasebnih interesov.
· I modify the article on the exceptions differentiating between protection of public and private interests.
· Skušal sem tudi opredeliti ravnanje z dokumenti tretjih strani, ki so se pri delu institucij običajno izkazali kot problematični.
· I also attempt to specify the regime to use for documents of third parties that usually caused many problems in the institutions practices.
· Dopolnil sem še člen o dokumentih, ki morajo biti objavljeni v Uradnem listu EU.
· I also modify the article on documents to be published in the Official Journal of the EU.
· Vnesel sem predlog spremembe o vlogi in odgovornosti uradnika za informiranje, v katerem predlagam okrepljeno vlogo evropskega varuha človekovih pravic kot referenčne točke, na katero bi se v primeru dvomov obrnili uradniki za informiranje v institucijah.
· I have inserted an amendment on the role and responsibility of the Information officer mentioned above by enhancing the role of the European Ombudsman as a point of reference for Information officers in the institutions who could be consulted in case of doubts.
· Na koncu sem vnesel tudi predlog spremembe o sankcijah v primeru nespoštovanja določb te uredbe.
· Finally, I inserted an amendment on Sanctions encountered for failing to comply with this regulation.
Moj cilj je seveda, da se uredba spremeni in se s tem doseže večja preglednost, ne da bi instrument postal preveč specifičen in težaven za izvajanje.
My goal is of course to modify this regulation in order to increase transparency without making this instrument too specific and difficult to implement.
Zato sem se posebej posvetil splošnim načelom, ki so še manjkali v sedanji uredbi v zvezi z zakonodajno in upravno dejavnostjo institucij.
Therefore, I worked on the general principles that were still missing in the current regulation as regards legislative and administrative activities of the institutions.
Hkrati si želim, da se bo instrument uporabil za boljšo prakso v institucijah in da se bodo te učile na preteklih izkušnjah, ki so bile osrednji vir navdiha pri pisanju predlogov sprememb.
At the same time, it is my aspiration that this instrument will be used to improve the institutions practices by learning from the past experiences which have been my main source of inspiration when drafting my amendments.
Predlog uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o dostopu javnosti do dokumentov Evropskega parlamenta, Sveta in Komisije
Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents
KOM(2008) 229 konč. z dne 30. aprila 2008 - 2008/0090 (COD)
COM( 2008) 229 final of 30.4.2008 - 2008/0090 (COD)
V skladu z medinstitucionalnim sporazumom z dne 28. novembra 2001 o bolj sistematičnem ponovnem sprejemu pravnih aktov, še zlasti točke 9, se je posvetovalna delovna skupina, ki jo sestavljajo pravne službe Evropskega parlamenta, Sveta in Komisije, srečala dne 20. maja 2008 in 4. junija, da bi proučila omenjeni predlog, ki ga je predložila Komisija.
Having regard to the Inter-institutional Agreement of 28 November 2001 on a more structured use of the recasting technique for legal acts, and in particular to point 9 thereof, the Consultative Working Party consisting of the respective legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission met on 20 May 2008 and 4 June for the purpose of examining the aforementioned proposal submitted by the Commission.
Posvetovalna skupina je imela na voljo angleško, francosko in nemško jezikovno različico predloga, svoje delo pa je opravila na osnovi angleške različice, saj je bila to izvirna različica obravnavanega besedila. po proučitvi predloga uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o prenovitvi Uredbe (ES) št. 1049/2001/ES z dne 30. maja 2001 o dostopu javnosti do dokumentov Evropskega parlamenta, Sveta in Komisije soglasno ugotovila naslednje:
The Consultative Working Party had at its disposal the English, French and German language versions of the proposal and worked on the basis of the English version, being the master-copy language version of the text under discussion. , an examination of the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council recasting Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents resulted in the Consultative Working Party’s establishing, by common accord, as follows.
1) V členu 7(1) bi bilo treba sklic na „odstavek 4 tega člena“ prilagoditi tako, da bi se glasil „odstavek 3 tega člena“.
1) In Article 7(1), the reference made to " paragraph 4 of this Article " should be adapted so as to read " paragraph 3 of this Article ".
2) V členu 9(1) bi bilo treba sklic na „člen 4(1)(a)“ prilagoditi tako, da bi se glasil „člen 4(1)“.
2) In Article 9(1), the reference made to " Article 4(1 )( a) " should be adapted so as to read " Article 4(1) ".
3) V členu 12(1) bi moralo biti dodano besedilo „zakonodajnih aktov EU ali nezakonodajnih aktov, ki se splošno uporabljajo“ označeno s sivim senčenjem, ki se ponavadi uporablja za označevanje vsebinskih sprememb.
3) In Article 12(1), the adding of the wording " EU legislative acts or non-legislative acts of general application shall " should have been identified by using the grey shaded type generally used for identifying substantive changes.
4) V členu 12(2) bi moralo biti dodano besedilo „v elektronski obliki“ označeno s sivim senčenjem, ki se ponavadi uporablja za označevanje vsebinskih sprememb.
4) In Article 12(2), the adding of the final words " in electronic form " should have been identified by using the grey shaded type generally used for identifying substantive changes.
o predlogu Uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o dostopu javnosti do dokumentov Evropskega parlamenta, Sveta in Komisije
on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (recast)
Eno od osnovnih načel Evropske unije je preglednost.
Transparency is a fundamental principle of the European Union.