natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Z začetkom veljave Lizbonske pogodbe in sprejetjem Uredbe (EU) št. 182/2011 ta posebni režim ne velja več.
With the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty and the adoption of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011, these special arrangements have now been terminated.
Izvršne odločbe na področju trgovinske politike, kot tudi na drugih področjih politik Evropske unije, sprejema samo Komisija.
Executive decisions on trade policy are now, as in all other fields of policy of the European Union, taken exclusively by the Commission.
To so lahko delegirani akti, za sprejetje katerih je Komisijo pooblastila zakonodajna oblast, ali pa izvedbene določbe, pri izvajanju katerih jo podpirajo države članice.
They take the form either of delegated legal acts, which the Commission is empowered by the legislature to adopt, or implementing provisions, where the Commission is supported by the Member States.
Spremembe določb o stari komitologiji
Amendments to the provisions on the old comitol ogy system
V predlogu Komisije so prilagoditve predvidene predvsem v primerih, ki so jih doslej posebej urejale odločbe Sveta.
The Commission is proposing changes only where the Council decisions specifically provided for have previously applied.
Komisija ne predvideva spremembe sklicev na stari postopek komitologije iz Sklepa Sveta 1999/468/ES, ki se pojavlja v uredbah.
The Commission does not propose altering the references to the old comitology procedures pursuant to Council Decision 1999/468/EC which are contained individually in the regulations.
Glede tega je Komisija že večkrat opozorila, da bo te prilagoditve obravnavala v drugem predlogu uredbe, in sicer predlogu uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o spremembi nekaterih uredb o skupni trgovinski politiki v zvezi z dodelitvijo delegiranih pooblastil za sprejetje nekaterih ukrepov (Omnibus II).
On this subject, the Commission has repeatedly stated that these adjustments are to be provided for in a second proposal for a regulation, the proposal for a European Parliament and Council regulation amending certain regulations relating to the common commercial policy as regards the granting of delegated powers for the adoption of certain measures (Omnibus II).
Pri pregledu tega predloga pa se je pokazalo, da je bila ta napoved le deloma uresničena.
However, upon examining this proposal it becomes clear that this stated intention has only partially been acted upon.
Zato to poročilo predvideva prilagoditev novega režima izvajanja v vseh zadevnih postopkih uredb, ki jih je zajela Komisija.
The present report therefore provides for the changes to the new implementation regime to be made in all the relevant procedures under the regulations referred to in the Commission proposal.
Vključitev dveh dodatnih uredb v ta predlog
Inclusion of two further regulations in the proposal at issue
Obe uredbi vsebujeta vrsto postopkovnih pravil, ki jih je treba prilagoditi, tako na področju stare komitologije kot tudi na področju natančno določenih odločb Sveta.
The two regulations include a series of procedural provisions requiring amendment both in the context of the old comitology procedures and in the field of specifically regulated Council decisions.
Zato sta neizogibno del cilja ureditve predloženega predloga Komisije in mu ju je treba dodati.
They unquestionably, therefore, form part of the corpus which the Commission proposal at issue seeks to regulate, and the proposal must be extended to cover them.
Upoštevanje skupnega razumevanja
Taking account of the ‘common understanding’
Evropski parlament se je s Komisijo in Svetom dogovoril o skupnem razumevanju, v skladu s katerim se za uporabo delegiranih aktov in izvedbenih določb uporablja enotni model.
The European Parliament reached a ‘common understanding’ with the Commission and Council making the use of delegated acts and of implementing provisions subject to a uniform model.
Predlog Komisije na začudenje poročevalke od te določitve večinoma odstopa.
To the rapporteur’s surprise, large parts of the Commission proposal deviate from the agreed provisions.
To ni sprejemljivo.
This is unacceptable.
Poročilo zato predlogu Komisije dodaja pogoje iz skupnega razumevanja.
The report therefore inserts the measures from the ‘common understanding’ in the Commission proposal.
S tem zagotavlja, da bo besedilo vse prihodnje evropske zakonodaje dosledno veljalo, kadar koli se bodo uporabili delegirani akti in izvedbene določbe.
In this way it ensures that the wording of all future European legislation will apply consistently whenever delegated acts or implementing provisions are used.
Poročilo potrjuje uvedbo delegiranih aktov na vseh področjih, ki jih je predlagala Komisija.
The report confirms the introduction of delegated acts in all the fields proposed by the Commission.
Poleg tega pa njihovo uporabo predvideva tudi v naslednjih uredbah:
In addition, it provides for their application in the following regulations:
· Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 3448/93 z dne 6. decembra 1993 o trgovinskih režimih za nekatero blago, pridobljeno s predelavo kmetijskih proizvodov;
· Council Regulation (EC) No 3448/93 of 6 December 1992 concerning trade arrangements applicable to certain goods resulting from the processing of agricultural products
· Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 427/2003 z dne 3. marca 2003 o posebnem prehodnem zaščitnem mehanizmu za določene izdelke pri uvozu s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske in spremembah Uredbe (ES) št. 519/94 o skupnih pravilih za uvoz iz nekaterih tretjih držav;
· Council Regulation (EC) No 427/2003 of 3 March 2003 on a transitional product-specific safeguard mechanism for imports originating in the People’s Republic of China and amending Regulation (EC) No 519/94 on common rules for imports from certain third countries
· Uredba Sveta ES št. 1236/2005 z dne 27. junija 2005 o trgovini z določenim blagom, ki bi se lahko uporabilo za izvršitev smrtne kazni, mučenje ali drugo okrutno, nečloveško ali poniževalno ravnanje ali kaznovanje;
· Council Regulation (EC° No 1236/2005 of 27 June 2005 concerning trade in certain goods which could be used for capital punishment, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
· Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 732/2008 z dne 22. julija 2008 o uporabi sheme splošnih tarifnih preferencialov v obdobju od 1. januarja 2009 do 31. decembra 2011 in spremembah uredb (ES) št. 552/97, (ES) št. 1933/2006 in uredb Komisije (ES) št. 1100/2006 in (ES) št. 964/2007.
· Council Regulation (EC) No 732/2008 of 22 July 2008 applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences for the period from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2011 and amending Regulations (EC) No 552/97, (EC) No 1933/2006 and Commission Regulations (EC) No 1100/2006 and (EC) No 964/2007
Poročilo priporoča uporabo delegiranih aktov v teh uredbah v naslednjih primerih:
The report recommends the use of delegated acts in these regulations for the following purposes:
– za spremembo ali prilagoditev ene ali več prilog k posamezni uredbi in
- to amend or adapt one or more annexes to the regulation concerned, and
– za sprejetje podrobnih določb za posebno izvajanje posameznih členov.
- to adopt detailed provisions for the specific implementation of individual articles.
V vseh primerih gre za nezakonodajne delegirane akte s splošno veljavo za dopolnitev ali spremembo nekaterih nebistvenih predpisov iz zadevnih zakonodajnih aktov v skladu s prvim odstavkom člena 290 PDEU.
In all these cases the delegated acts are generally applicable acts of a non-legislative character, supplementing or amending certain non-essential provisions of the relevant legislative act pursuant to Article 290(1) TFEU.
Teh področij ni mogoče prepustiti ureditvi z izvedbenimi določbami.
These fields cannot be left to be regulated by means of implementing provisions.
Nazadnje gre za zakonodajne pristojnosti, ki jih mora izvajati zakonodajna oblast sama, ali pa jih lahko delegira.
That would not be right, because legislative powers are at stake in these cases which the legislature must either exercise itself or, if it so chooses, delegate.
Poročilo vsakokrat priporoča drugo možnost.
The report recommends the second option in each case.
Poleg tega se lahko samo z instrumentom delegiranja zagotovi kontrola Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta nad Komisijo.
Moreover, only by means of delegation can scrutiny of the Commission’s actions by the European Parliament and Council be guaranteed.
Poseben primer: generalizirani sistem carinskih preferencialov (GSP)
A special case: the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP)
GSP v tem poročilu predstavlja izjemni primer.
The GSP constitutes a special case in this report.
Razprava o uporabi delegiranih aktov in izvedbenih določb je potekala že od konca leta 2010 do začetka leta 2011 v zvezi z Uredbo (EU) št. 512/2011 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 11. maja 2011 o spremembah Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 732/2008 o uporabi sheme splošnih tarifnih preferencialov v obdobju od 1. januarja 2009 do 31. decembra 2011.
The use of delegated acts and implementing provisions was already debated between the end of 2010 and beginning of 2011 in connection with Regulation (EU) No 512/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2011 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 732/2008 applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences for the period from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2011.
Pri tem je šlo za manjše prilagoditve uredbe o GSP, da bi se podaljšalo obdobje njene veljave.
In that case relatively minor adjustments were made to the GSP Regulation to extend its period of validity.
Parlament in poročevalec Helmut Scholz sta v poročilu sprva zahtevala takojšnjo uporabo delegiranih aktov v njej.
In the report, Parliament and the rapporteur, Mr Scholz, originally called for the immediate use of delegated acts in the regulation.
Da ne bi po nepotrebnem zavlačevali potrebnega podaljšanja veljavnosti, sta se Parlament in Svet strinjala, da bosta pogajanja o dejanski uporabi delegiranih aktov in izvedbenih določb prestavila na ta zakonodajni postopek.
In order to avoid unnecessarily prolonging the necessary extension of validity, however, Parliament and the Council agreed to postpone the negotiations on the actual use of delegated acts and implementing provisions until the legislative procedure now under way.
Poročilo zato dosledno prevzema vse zahteve Evropskega parlamenta iz pomladi leta 2011.
The report therefore consistently takes up all the European Parliament’s demands of spring 2011.
Natančneje gre za normiranje delegiranih aktov v naslednjih primerih: dodelitev posebnega spodbujevalnega režima za trajnostni razvoj in dobro upravljanje, sprejetje pravil za izvedbo znižanja splošne carinske tarife za izdelke tarifne številke 1701 in odpravo splošne carinske tarife za izdelke tarifnih številk 1006 in 1701, črtanje države iz priloge I in sprememba vseh prilog zaradi spremembe kombinirane nomenklature, zaradi sprememb mednarodnega statusa ali klasifikacije držav ali območij, zaradi doseganja določenih pragov v posamezni državi ali zaradi priprave dokončnega seznama upravičenih držav.
More specifically, it is a matter of laying down rules on delegated acts in the following cases: granting of special incentive arrangements for sustainable development and good governance, adoption of rules on the reduction of the Common Customs Tariff duties on the products of tariff heading 1701 and the abolition of the Common Customs Tariff duties on the products of tariff headings 1006 and 1701, deletion of a country from Annex I and amendment of all annexes on account of changes in the international status or classification of countries or territories, on account of the attainment in a country of the threshold values set or on account of the establishment of a final list of beneficiary countries.
Postopek pregleda ali posvetovalni postopek
Examination procedure or advisory procedure
To poročilo potrjuje predlog Komisije za uporabo postopka pregleda pri izvedbenih določbah v večini primerov.
The present report confirms the Commission proposal to use the examination procedure in the case of the application of implementing provisions in the vast majority of cases.
Zlasti pri sprejetju dokončnih protidampinških, protisubvencijskih in varnostnih ukrepov je postopek pregleda po poročevalkinem mnenju prava izbira.
Particularly where final anti-dumping, anti-subsidy and safeguard measures are concerned, the rapporteur believes that the examination procedure is the right choice.
To izhaja že iz določb Uredbe (EU) št. 182/2011.
This is already implied by the provisions of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.
Poročilo v nasprotju s predlogom Komisije priporoča uporabo svetovalnega postopka v vseh primerih, v katerih se mora Komisija pred odločitvijo posvetovati z državami članicami in v katerih bi dolgotrajni mehanizem odločanja pri postopku pregleda oviral sprejetje odločitve.
In a departure from the Commission proposal, however, the report recommends using the advisory procedure in all cases where it is necessary that the Commission should consult the Member States before taking a decision but in which the protracted decision-making involved in the examination procedure is an obstacle to the objective of arriving at a decision.
To bi bilo nesporno pri sprejetju začasnih varnostnih ukrepov, nadzornih ukrepov in opustitvenih ukrepov v okviru instrumentov trgovinske zaščite.
This would be incontestable in conjunction with the adoption of provisional safeguard measures, surveillance measures and suspension measures as part of trade policy defence instruments.
V teh primerih se mora Komisija hitro in učinkovito odzvati.
In these cases, a quick, effective response from the Commission is called for.
Pri tem je odločilnega pomena, da nobena od teh odločitev ne predstavlja končnih ukrepov ali sklepov.
The decisive factor here is that none of these decisions involves final measures or decisions.
Gre bolj za sprejetje časovno omejenih in prehodnih ukrepov ali za pripravo dokončne odločitve.
Rather, it is a matter either of adopting temporary measures or of preparing a definitive decision.
Ker se o končnih odločitvah vedno odloča v okviru postopka pregleda, je še vedno zagotovljen zadosten nadzor držav članic nad celotnim ciklusom odločanja.
As the definitive decisions in each case are always agreed by means of the examination procedure, sufficient scrutiny by Member States remains guaranteed in the course of the decision-making cycle as a whole.
Da se prepreči podvajanje procesov oblikovanja mnenja in odločanja, je treba pri pripravi oz. pri začasni ureditvi zadev uporabiti svetovalni postopek.
In order to avoid duplication of opinion-forming and decision-making processes, it is consistent to adopt the advisory procedure where a decision needs to be prepared or a temporary decision taken.
S to odločitvijo je poročilo v skladu z dogovorom Parlamenta in Sveta iz Uredbe (EU) št. 511/2011 z dne 11. maja 2011 o izvajanju dvostranske zaščitne klavzule Sporazuma o prosti trgovini med Evropsko unijo in njenimi državami članicami in Republiko Korejo.
In this decision, the report adheres to the line agreed by Parliament and the Council with regard to Regulation (EU) No 511/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2011 implementing the bilateral safeguard clause of the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States and the Republic of Korea.
Pri sprejetju začasnih varnostnih ukrepov je treba poleg uporabe svetovalnega postopka omogočiti sprejetje takojšnjih ukrepov z neposredno veljavnimi izvedbenimi določbami.
Where temporary safeguard measures are adopted, moreover, in addition to using the advisory procedure there must be provision for immediate measures to be adopted by means of implementing provisions which are immediately applicable.
Za sprejetje začasnih protidampinških in protisubvencijskih ukrepov je zaradi nujnosti in časovnih omejitev smiselna samo uporaba takoj veljavnih izvedbenih določb v povezavi s svetovalnim postopkom.
For the adoption of provisional anti-dumping or anti-subsidy measures, only the use of implementing measures which are immediately applicable, in conjunction with the advisory procedure, makes sense, because of the urgency and the short time frame.
Predlog Komisije za neposredno veljavne izvedbene določbe predvideva postopek pregleda.
The Commission proposal provides for the examination procedure to apply to implementing provisions which are immediately applicable.
Pri tem pa obstaja nevarnost, da se bodo takojšnji ukrepi kmalu po sprejetju v državah članicah vrnili v postopku pregleda, ne da bi bila prej sprejeta odločitev o končnih ukrepih.
Here, however, there is a danger that, shortly after immediate measures have been adopted, the examination procedure may result in their being rescinded without any decision having been taken on the definitive measures.
Morebitne razprave o končnih ukrepih bi bile prestavljene v fazo sklepa o začasnih ukrepih, s čimer bi se upočasnil napredek postopka.
Any discussions with a view to definitive measures would be deferred until the stage at which temporary measures were decided, thus holding up the progress of the further procedure.
Zato ne bi bilo mogoče upoštevati določenih rokov v vseh naslednjih fazah.
During all subsequent stages of the procedure, therefore, it would be impossible to respect the time limits set.
Pisni postopek
Written procedure
Predsedujoči posameznemu svetovalnemu odboru in odboru za pregled lahko v skladu z Uredbo (EU) št. 182/2011 v enostavnih zadevah odredi tako imenovani pisni postopek.
Pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 the chair of an advisory or examination committee can order a written procedure in simple cases.
V uredbi je predvideno, da če ni drugače določeno, se pisnega postopka ne sme izvesti, če mu nasprotuje vsaj ena država članica.
The Regulation lays down that, except as otherwise provided, the written procedure may not be applied if a Member State objects.
Poročilo za vse zadevne uredbe vsebuje drugačno ureditev.
The report contains a different rule for all the regulations with which it is concerned.
V skladu s tem se pisni postopek zaključi takrat, ko to zahtevajo države članice s kvalificirano večino.
It stipulates that the written procedure is to be terminated only if a qualified majority of Member States calls for this.
Poleg tega se poročilo pri enostavnih primerih – kot je prekinitev postopka – izrecno sklicuje na pisni postopek, da bi spodbudilo njegovo uporabo.
The report also contains an explicit reference to the written procedure, in order to encourage its use, in simple cases such as the termination of the procedure.
Posvetovalni postopek
Consultation procedures
Poročilo soglaša s pravnim pojmovanjem Komisije, da je posvetovalni postopek, ki je do zdaj še obstajal v instrumentih trgovinske zaščite, po začetku veljave Lizbonske pogodbe in sprejetju Uredbe (EU) št. 182/2011 nedopusten.
The report endorses the Commission’s interpretation of the law in taking the view that, with the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty and the adoption of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011, the consultation procedures which have existed to date as part of trade-policy safeguard measures are inadmissible.
Pristojnost za izvedbo zadevnih uredb ima odslej samo Komisija.
The power to implement the regulations in question is now reserved exclusively to the Commission.
Države članice v skladu z drugim in tretjim odstavkom člena 291 PDEU v povezavi z Uredbo (EU) št. 182/2011 Komisijo pri tem podpirajo.
Pursuant to Article 291(2) and (3) TFEU in conjunction with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011, the Commission is to be assisted by the Member States in this context.
Svet kot institucija Evropske unije na tem področju nima nobenih pristojnosti več.
The Council no longer has any powers at all in this field as an EU institution.
V Lizbonski pogodbi je izrecno izključeno posvetovanje Komisije s Svetom.
The Lisbon Treaty explicitly excludes the possibility that the Commission might consult the Council.
Tesno sodelovanje med Komisijo in državami članicami pa je še vedno smiselno in nujno v postopkih za sprejem ukrepov trgovinske zaščite.
On the other hand, close cooperation between the Commission and Member States in the procedures for the adoption of trade-policy safeguard measures is worthwhile and continues to be required.
Komisija bi morala države članice vključiti v vse faze odločanja o ukrepih trgovinske zaščite.
The Commission should involve the Member States in all stages of decision-making on trade-policy safeguard measures.
Tako bo mogoče zgodaj prepoznati in rešiti morebitne težave pri izvajanju uredbe o zaščiti.
This will make it possible for any problems in implementing a safeguard regulation to be identified and dealt with at an early stage.
In samo tako bo mogoče preprečiti zamudne polemike v postopku pregleda ali celo v pritožbenem postopku.
This is the only way of preventing time-consuming controversies from arising during the advisory procedure or even the appeal procedure.
Zato poročilo v protidampinški in protisubvencijski uredbi namesto posvetovanja na začetku postopka predvideva obveznost Komisije, da obvešča države članice, kot tudi možnost držav članic, da čim prej izrazijo svoje stališče.
In the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy regulation, therefore, rather than consultations when the procedure is initiated, the report requires the Commission to inform Member States and makes it possible for Member States to indicate their positions at an early stage.
Poročilo v nobenem od primerov dosedanjega posvetovalnega postopka ne nadomešča s svetovalnim postopkom.
In none of the cases in question does the report replace the previous consultation procedures with an advisory procedure.
Poročevalka je trdno prepričana, da bi bilo to v nasprotju z duhom Lizbonske pogodbe v povezavi z Uredbo (EU) št. 182/2011 ter da bi bilo izredno kontraproduktivno za potek postopka.
The rapporteur firmly believes not only that this would be contrary to the spirit of the Lisbon Treaty in conjunction with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 but also that it would be extremely counterproductive for the conduct of the procedures themselves.
Predvsem pri protidampinških in protisubvencijskih postopkih, za katere veljajo strogi roki, je nemogoče uvesti dodatne korake.
Particularly in the case of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy procedures, where strict time limits apply, it would be impossible to incorporate additional stages.
Za svetovalni postopek se uporablja zelo formalen potek.
The advisory procedure is very formalised.
Uvedba takšne vrste postopka v postopek sprejetja ukrepov trgovinske zaščite bi pomenila veliko upočasnitev na škodo vseh sodelujočih.
If a procedure of this kind were to be introduced as part of procedures for the adoption of trade-policy safeguard measures, it would lead to substantial delays, which would be to the detriment of all parties concerned.
Roki v protidampinški in protisubvencijski uredbi
Time limits in the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy regulation
V predlogu Komisije je v protidampinški in protisubvencijski uredbi predvidena možnost podaljšanja rokov, do katerih je treba dokončati protidampinške in protisubvencijske postopke.
The Commission proposal provides for a possible extension of the deadlines for completing anti-dumping and anti-subsidy procedures to be incorporated in the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy regulation.
Doslej je za protidampinške postopke veljal rok največ 15 mesecev, za protisubvencijske postopke pa največ 13 mesecev.
Hitherto, a time limit of 15 months has applied to anti-dumping procedures and 13 months to anti-subsidy procedures.
V predlogu Komisije je odslej predvidena možnost podaljšanja rokov na največ 18 mesecev.
The Commission proposal now permits the time limits to be extended to a maximum of 18 months.
To je hkrati najdaljši dovoljeni rok v skladu z zakonodajo WTO.
This is also the maximum permitted under WTO law.
Trajanje protidampinških in protisubvencijskih postopkov je bistveno za odnose s trgovinskimi partnerji in zanesljivo načrtovanje v industriji.
The duration of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy procedures is essential for relations with all trading partners and to give industry the certainty required for planning.