natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
v zvezi s tem ugotavlja, da priključitev desetih novih držav članic očitno ni vplivala na število registriranih kršitev, ter poziva Komisijo, naj da Parlamentu jasna pojasnila in zagotovila, da to ni posledica pomanjkanja registracij pritožb ali/in pomanjkanja notranjih virov, ki se v Komisiji ukvarjajo s kršitvami, in/ali politične odločitve, da bo do teh držav članic bolj prizanesljiva;
Notes accordingly that the accession of 10 new Member States seems not to have had any impact on the number of registered infringements, and calls on the Commission to give Parliamenta clear explanation and reassurance that this is not due to a lack of registration of complaints or to a lack of internal resources dealing with infringements within the Commission or to a political decision to be more indulgent towards those Member States;
pozdravlja pripravljenost večine ustreznih generalnih direktoratov, da priskrbijo informacije o dodeljenih sredstvih za kršitve na svojem področju kot tudi o stanju postopkov za ugotavljanje kršitev; ugotavlja, da ima vsak generalni direktorat svoj način uporabe prava Skupnosti in dodeljevanja sredstev ter da ni natančnega pregleda in splošne javne ocene različnih delovnih pristopov;
Welcomes the willingness of most of the relevant Directorates-General to provide information on the resources allocated to infringements in their respective areas as well as on the state of infringement proceedings; notes that each Directorate-General has its own way of dealing with the application of Community law and with the allocation of resources and that there is no precise overview and public general evaluation of the way these different approaches work;
se zavezuje, da bo Komisijo podprl s povečanjem proračunskih sredstev za povečanje sredstev, kot zahteva večina relevantnih generalnih direktoratov;
Commits itself to supporting the Commission via increased budget appropriations for an increase of resources, as requested by most of the Directorates-General concerned;
pozdravlja dejstvo, da so nekateri generalni direktorati razvili posebne mehanizme kot dodatek k postopkom za ugotavljanje kršitev, s katerimi naj bi dosegli učinkovit nadzor in utrditev uporabe prava Skupnosti; ugotavlja, da so bili v regulativnem okviru za elektronske komunikacije iz leta 2002 vzpostavljeni postopki obveščanja za osnutke nacionalnih zakonodajnih ukrepov, ki omogočajo sodelovanje med nacionalnimi regulativnimi organi držav članic in Komisijo v kratkem časovnem okviru; poziva Komisijo, naj razmisli o sistematičnem izvajanju tega preventivnega mehanizma tudi v drugih sektorjih;
Welcomes the fact that some Directorates-General have developed specific mechanisms to supplement the use of infringement proceedings with a view to achieving an effective monitoring and consolidation of the application of Community law; notes that, in the 2002 regulatory framework for electronic communications, the notification procedures in respect of draft national legislative measures were established, permitting collaboration among the national regulatory authorities of the Member States and the Commission within a short time frame; calls on the Commission to consider the systematic application of this preventive mechanism to other sectors;
meni, da je treba spodbujati izmenjavo najboljše prakse med državami, na primer v obliki paketnih sej in prenosnih delavnic, ki jih organizira Komisija, da bi omogočila uporabo prava Skupnosti; poziva Komisijo, naj preuči, kako bi lahko Parlament sodeloval v tovrstnih postopkih;
Considers that the sharing of best practices between the Member States, for example in the form of package meetings and transposition workshops organised by the Commission to facilitate the application of Community law, should be encouraged; calls on the Commission to consider means of involving Parliament in such processes;
pozdravlja prizadevanja nekaterih generalnih direktoratov Komisije, zlasti generalnega direktorata za okolje, za boljše preverjanje skladnosti ustreznih direktiv, ni pa zadovoljen z odgovorom Komisije glede zaupnosti teh študij skladnosti; ponovno poziva Komisijo, naj na svoji spletni strani objavi študije o oceni skladnosti nacionalnih izvedbenih ukrepov s pravom Skupnosti, ki so jih zahtevali posamezni generalni direktorati;
Welcomes the efforts made by some Directorates-General of the Commission – and notably DG Environment – to improve the conformity checks on the relevant directives, but is not satisfied with the Commission's answer concerning the confidentiality of the conformity studies; calls once more on the Commission to publish on its website the studies requested by the various Directorates-General on the evaluation of the conformity of national implementation measures with Community legislation;
pozdravlja prvo vključitev podrobnosti o posebni in natančni obravnavi kršitev, povezanih s peticijami, v letno poročilo in z njim povezane priloge;
Welcomes the inclusion in the Annual Report and its related annexes for the first time of particulars of the specific and detailed treatment of infringements relating to petitions;
spodbuja pošiljanje misij za ugotavljanje dejstev v različne države članice, da bi preučile vprašanja vlagateljev peticij; meni, da je to praktičen način neposrednega reševanja problemov z državami članicami, ki je v interesu državljanov; meni, da so takšne misije toliko bolj potrebne, glede na to, da Komisija nima nadzornih pooblastil za preverjanje izvajanja prava Skupnosti v praksi, na primer, na področju okolja;
Encourages the practice of sending fact-finding missions to various Member States to investigate issues raised by petitioners; regards this as a pragmatic way of solving problems directly with Member States in the interests of the citizen; believes that such missions are all the more necessary in the light of the Commission's lack of "inspection" powers for verifying the practical implementation of EC law, for example in the area of the environment;
pozdravlja zavezo Komisije, da bo v prihodnje zakonodajne predloge praviloma vključevala povzetke za državljane oziroma prebivalce, ter zahteva konkretne primere takšnih povzetkov in pa pojasnilo, da ti povzetki tvorijo sestavni del zadevnih pravnih aktov, kot se zahteva v odstavku 19 resolucije Evropskega parlamenta z dne 16. maja 2006 o 21. in 22. letnem poročilu Komisije o nadzoru uporabe zakonodaje Skupnosti (2003 in 2004) UL C 297 E, 7.12.2006, str.
Welcomes the Commission's commitment as a rule to include citizens' or peoples' summaries in future legislative proposals and requests concrete examples of such summaries as well as clarification that they form an integral part of the legal act concerned, as called for in paragraph 19 of Parliament's resolution of 16 May 2006 on the Commission's 21st and 22nd Annual reports on monitoring the application of Community law (2003 and 2004) OJ C 297 E, 7.12.2006, p.
meni, da bi morala biti Komisija bolj dejavna pri spremljanju dogodkov na nacionalni ravni, ki lahko razkrijejo kršenje prava Skupnosti; zato poziva Komisijo, naj za preprečevanje in popravo kršitev bolj uporablja svoja predstavništva;
Believes that the Commission should be more proactive in monitoring national events which may disclose a breach of Community law; calls on the Commission, therefore, to make more intensive use of its Representation Offices to prevent or remedy infringements;
poziva države članice, naj presežejo povsem formalen prenos zakonodaje Skupnosti in se, kolikor je mogoče, izognejo razdrobljenemu prenosu direktiv, da zakonodaja postane preprostejša in preglednejša;
Calls on the Member States to go beyond a purely formal transposition of Community legislation and to avoid, as far as possible, the fragmentary transposition of directives, with a view to making legislation simpler and more transparent;
pozdravlja dejstvo, da Komisija v zgoraj navedenem sporočilu z naslovom "Evropa rezultatov – uporaba prava skupnosti" obravnava nekatera poglavitna politična vprašanja, ki jih je v zgoraj navedeni resoluciji z dne 16. maja 2006 postavil Parlament; ugotavlja pa, da še ni odgovora na nekatera pomembna vprašanja in ostajajo odprta, zlasti kar zadeva sredstva, namenjena obravnavanju kršitev, dolžino postopkov za ugotavljanje kršitev in zelo omejeno rabo člena 228 Pogodbe ES ter oceno o uporabi merila prednostni; poziva Komisijo, naj zagotovi odgovore na ta pomembna vprašanja do maja 2008;
Welcomes the fact that, in its above-mentioned Communication entitled "A Europe of results – Applying Community law", the Commission addresses some of the main policy issues raised in Parliament's above-mentioned resolution of 16 May 2006; notes, however, that some important issues are still pending and were not fully answered, notably those concerning the resources allocated to deal with infringement cases, the length of the infringement procedure and the very limited use of Article 228 of the EC Treaty, and the evaluation of the application of the priority criteria; asks the Commission to provide an answer with regard to these important issues by May 2008;
Sporočilo Komisije iz leta 2007 "Evropa rezultatov – uporaba prava skupnosti"
The Commission's 2007 Communication on "A Europe of results – Applying Community law"
pozdravlja dejstvo, da Komisija v zgoraj navedenem sporočilu iz leta 2007 pripisuje pomen vprašanju uporabe prava Skupnosti in ga ustrezno upošteva;
Welcomes the fact that, in its above-mentioned Communication, the Commission attaches value to, and takes duly into account, the issue of the application of Community law;
ugotavlja, da je pregled peticij pokazal, kar se zdi strukturna šibkost pri tem, da države članice izvajajo različne norme prava Skupnosti; meni, da ja treba za zagotavljanje skladnosti in doslednosti prava Skupnosti redno posredovati Sodišču Evropskih skupnosti kršitve prava Skupnosti, vsaj v zadevah, ki so nacionalnega pomena in določajo precedense za nacionalne sodne prakse in izvajanje v prihodnosti; meni, da skladnost pri Komisiji v tem pogledu lahko močno zmanjša posledično potrebo državljanov po pritožbah Komisiji in peticijah Parlamentu na podobno temo;
Notes that the examination of petitions has revealed what appear to be structural weaknesses in the implementation by Member States of various norms of Community law; is of the opinion that, in order to ensure the consistency and coherence of Community law, infringements of Community law must be consistently brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities, at least in nationally important cases which set a precedent for national case-law and future practice; takes the view that consistency on the part of the Commission in this respect could significantly reduce citizens' subsequent need to complain to the Commission and petition Parliament on analogous issues;
ugotavlja, da glavna ovira za učinkovitost postopka za ugotavljanje kršitev (člena 226 in 228 Pogodbe ES) ostaja dolžina postopka in omejena raba člena 228; vztraja, da se ciljnega roka, ki ga Komisija predlaga v zvezi z nesporočanjem ukrepov za prenos (ne več kot 12 mesecev po tem, ko je bil poslan uradni dopis o razrešitvi primera ali je o zadevi začelo razsojati Sodišče) in v zvezi s postopki za zagotavljanje skladnosti s predhodno sodbo Sodišča (od 12 do 24 mesecev), ne sme preseči v nobenem primeru ter zato poziva Komisijo, naj v tem roku izvaja redno spremljanje napredka postopka za ugotavljanje kršitev in naj o tem obvešča državljane;
Notes that the main obstacles to the effectiveness of the infringement procedure (Articles 226 and 228 of the EC Treaty) remain its length and the limited recourse to Article 228; insists that the time-limits proposed by the Commission in respect of the non-communication of transposition measures (no more than 12 months from the sending of the letter of formal notice to the resolution of the case or the Court of Justice being seised of the matter) and in respect of proceedings to ensure compliance with an earlier judgment of the Court (between 12 and 24 months) must in no case be exceeded, and, to that end, calls on the Commission to carry out, within those time-limits, periodic monitoring of the progress of infringement procedures and to inform the citizens concerned thereof;
poziva Komisijo, naj bo bolj odločna pri uporabi člena 228 Pogodbe, da zagotovi ustrezno upoštevanje sodb Sodišča;
Calls on the Commission to be more firm in applying Article 228 of the Treaty in order to ensure that judgments of the Court of Justice are properly complied with;
opaža, da je Komisija pogosto edini preostali organ, na katerega se državljani lahko obrnejo, da bi se pritožili zaradi neuporabe prava Skupnosti; je zato zaskrbljen, da bi z vračanjem zadevni državi članici (ki je pravzaprav odgovorna za nepravilno uporabo prava Skupnosti) nova delovna metoda predstavljala tveganje, da se zmanjša Komisijina institucionalna odgovornost zagotavljanja uporabe prava Skupnosti, in sicer kot varuh pogodb v skladu s členom 211 Pogodbe ES;
Observes that the Commission is often the only body left to which citizens can turn to complain about the non-application of Community law; is therefore concerned that, by referring back to the Member State concerned (which is the party responsible for the incorrect application of Community law in the first place), the new working method could present a risk of weakening the Commission's institutional responsibility for ensuring the application of Community law as the "guardian of the Treaty" in accordance with Article 211 of the EC Treaty;
ugotavlja, da Komisija izjavlja, da nova delovna metoda ne nadomešča postopka za ugotavljanje kršitev in da se zavezuje k njeni uporabi le v fazi pred ugotavljanjem kršitev, v skladu z natančnim načrtom in strogimi roki;
Takes note that the Commission declares that the new working method is not a replacement of the infringement procedure and that it commits itself to applying it only in the pre-infringement phase, according to a precise timetable and strict deadlines;
poziva Komisijo, naj zagotovi, da nova metoda ne bo vplivala na veljavna postopkovna jamstva, ki jih uživa pritožnik, ter opozarja Komisijo, da je glede na sklepe varuha človekovih pravic opustitev registracije pritožbe nepravilnost; poudarja, da je treba v ta namen pritožbo razumeti kot kakršno koli korespondenco, za katero se lahko izkaže, da vsebuje pritožbo glede kršitve prava Skupnosti, ali ki je na kakšen drug način opredeljena kot pritožba;
Asks the Commission to ensure that the existing procedural guarantees given to the complainant will not be affected by the new method and reminds the Commission that, according to the European Ombudsman's decisions, failure to register a complaint constitutes maladministration; points out that, for this purpose, a complaint should be understood as any correspondence which is likely to disclose a violation of Community law or which is otherwise categorised as a complaint;
poudarja, kako pomembno je, da Komisija vseskozi med postopkom obvešča pritožnika o vsebini vse korespondence z državami članicami glede njegove pritožbe, zlasti še v fazi pred ugotavljanjem kršitev, če se uporabi nova metoda;
Stresses the importance of the Commission keeping the complainant informed of the substance of all correspondence with Member States concerning his complaint throughout the procedure and more notably in the pre-infringement phase if the new method is applied;
meni, da je začasno prenehanje veljavnosti nekaterih delov trenutno veljavnega Komisijinega notranjega priročnika o postopkih sporno, saj pilotni projekt ne vključuje vseh držav članic niti vseh sektorjev, nova metoda pa še ni popolnoma nameščena; meni, da bi to lahko povzročilo tako notranjo zmedo kot zmedo pri državljanih glede vprašanja, katere postopke uporabiti, zlasti kar zadeva podobne kršitve v različnih državah članicah; zahteva dostop do notranjega priročnika o postopkih;
Considers that the suspension of some parts of the Commission's current internal Manual of Procedures is questionable, since not all Member States and not all sectors are included in the pilot project and the new method is not fully in place; considers that this could result in confusion both internally and vis-à-vis citizens with respect to the procedures to be applied, especially as regards similar infringements committed in different Member States; asks that it be given access to the internal Manual of Procedures;
soglaša, da je pomembno nameniti vire ugotavljanju skladnosti, vendar vztraja, da mora biti obravnavanju kršitev namenjeno več človeških virov; zlasti je zaskrbljen, ker so za zmanjšanje števila kršitev po širitvi dejansko lahko vzrok nezadostni viri za ustrezno izvajanje veljavne zakonodaje EU; poziva Komisijo, naj da Parlamentu na voljo natančne podatke o številu delovnih mest ter višini sredstev, ki bodo v proračunu za leto 2008 namenjena specifično obravnavanju kršitev;
Agrees on the importance of deploying resources to conformity assessments, but insists that more human resources have to be devoted to dealing with infringements; is particularly concerned that the diminution in the number of infringements after enlargement could indeed originate from insufficient means to properly follow up the implementation of EU law; calls on the Commission to provide Parliament with specific data concerning the number of posts and the volume of resources that will be devoted under the 2008 budget specifically to dealing with infringements;
pozdravlja predlog Komisije o preizkusu nove delovne metode s poskusnim izvajanjem; vseeno pa izraža skrb, da lahko pride do nedoslednosti in zmede med državami članicami, ki sodelujejo v pilotnem projektu, in ostalimi državami članicami, saj začasno prenehanje veljavnosti notranjega postopka zaradi uvedbe nove delovne metode velja za vse primere;
Welcomes the Commission's suggestion that the new working method be tested through a pilot exercise; expresses concern, however, that some inconsistency and confusion could arise between those Member States that are part of the pilot project and those that are not, as the suspension of the internal procedure deriving from the introduction of the new working method applies in all cases;
poziva Komisijo, naj se osredotoči na predlagano poskusno izvajanje v tistih državah članicah, kjer uporaba prava ostaja Skupnosti problematična, kar je posledica pomanjkljivega sodelovanja nacionalnih oblasti, zlasti na regionalni in lokalni ravni; poziva Komisijo, naj s pomočjo poskusnega izvajanja preveri, ali in kje bo potrebnih več sredstev znotraj Komisije za obravnavanje in vodenje pritožb po vzpostavitvi nove delovne metode;
Asks the Commission to focus the proposed pilot exercise on those Member States in which the application of Community law remains problematic as a result of a lack of cooperation on the part of national authorities, especially at regional and local level; asks the Commission to verify through the pilot exercise whether, and if so where, more resources are needed within the Commission to handle and manage complaints following the setting-up of the new working method;
ker peticije in pritožbe državljanov in podjetij olajšajo odkritje velikega števila kršitev ter da bi se izognili zmedi pri navezovanju stikov z raznimi organi, ki rešujejo probleme, poziva Komisijo, naj preuči možnost jasnega označevanja ali ustanovitve spletne informacijske točke, kjer bi bilo vse na enem mestu, da bi pomagala državljanom;
Given that petitions and complaints from citizens and businesses facilitate the detection of a very substantial number of infringements, and in order to avoid confusion in contacting the various problem-solving bodies, urges the Commission to investigate the possibility of clear signposting or the creation of an on-line one-stop-shop in order to assist citizens;
pozdravlja odločitev Komisije, da "bo uvedla pogostejše sprejemanje odločitev za večino stopenj postopka, da se omogoči hitrejši napredek"; ugotavlja, da Komisija organizira štiri uradna srečanja na leto za odločanje o postopkih glede ugotavljanja kršitev, in pozdravlja odločitev Komisije o pogostejšem sprejemanju odločitev glede kršitev; obžaluje, da v sporočilu niso opredeljeni močnejši politični in organizacijski ukrepi za soočanje z novimi obveznostmi;
Welcomes the Commission's decision to "introduce more frequent decision-taking for most procedural steps to allow for quicker progress"; notes that the Commission organises four formal meetings a year to decide on infringement procedures, and welcomes the Commission's decision to have more frequent decision-taking on infringements; regrets that the Communication did not define stronger political and organisational measures to tackle these new commitments;
obžaluje, da Komisija ni spoštovala svoje zaveze, objavljene v sporočilu iz leta 2002 o boljšem nadzoru nad uporabo prava Skupnosti, in sicer, da se bo izvajanje prednostnega merila ocenjevalo letno, ob razpravi o poročilu o nadzoru nad uporabo prava Skupnosti KOM(2002)0725 , oddelek 3.1.
Regrets that the Commission did not respect its commitment, announced in its 2002 Communication on "Better monitoring of the application of Community law", that "the application of the priority criteria will be assessed annually, when the report on the monitoring of the application of Community law is discussed" COM(2002)0725 , section 3.2.
; pozdravlja novo zavezo Komisije, da bo "svoje ukrepanje glede teh prednostnih nalog po letu 2008 opisala in pojasnila v svojih letnih poročilih" KOM(2007)0502 , oddelek 3.
; welcomes its new commitment to "describe and explain its action on these priorities in its annual reports, from 2008" COM(2007)0502 , section 3.
ugotavlja, da Parlament še vedno prejema peticije v zvezi z domnevnimi vztrajnimi kršitvami človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin predlagateljev peticij v državah članicah, in globoko obžaluje, da so merila za kršitve človekovih pravic ali temeljnih svoboščin, zapisana v materialnem pravu Skupnosti, izginila z novega seznama prednostnih meril; opozarja, da ima Parlament v skladu s Pogodbo o EU pristojnost začeti postopek iz člena 7(1) navedene pogodbe;
Notes that Parliament has continued to receive petitions alleging persistent breaches by Member States of the petitioners' human and fundamental rights and deeply regrets that the criteria for violations of the human rights or fundamental freedoms enshrined in substantive Community law have disappeared from the new list of priority criteria; recalls that the EU Treaty gives Parliament the power to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 7(1) of that Treaty;
poziva Komisijo, naj obsežno uporablja načelo, da mora biti vsa korespondenca, za katero se lahko izkaže, da vsebuje pritožbo glede dejanske kršitve prava Skupnosti, registrirana kot pritožba, razen v izjemnih okoliščinah iz točke 3 priloge sporočila o odnosih s pritožnikom v zvezi s kršitvami prava Skupnosti KOM(2002)0141 .
Urges the Commission to extensively apply the principle that all correspondence which is likely to denounce a real violation of Community law should be registered as a complaint, unless it falls within the exceptional circumstances referred to in point 3 of the Annex to the Communication on "Relations with the complainant in respect of infringements of Community law" COM(2002)0141 .
; ugotavlja, da je Evropski varuh človekovih pravic nedavno ugotovil, da je Komisija odgovorna za nepravilnost, ker ni registrirala pritožbe v skladu s tem sporočilom; poziva Komisijo, naj parlament obvešča in se z njim posvetuje o vseh spremembah izrednih meril za neregistracijo pritožb;
; notes that the European Ombudsman has recently found the Commission responsible for "maladministration" for not having registered a complaint in accordance with that Communication; urges the Commission to inform and consult Parliament on any changes in the exceptional criteria for the non-registration of complaints;