natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
vztraja, da je treba vsako zmanjšanje obsega zakonodaje nadomestiti z večjim poudarkom na njenem izvajanju; poudarja, da so pritožbe stroškovno učinkovito in uspešno orodje za nadzor uporabe prava Skupnosti, ter poziva Komisijo, naj zagotovi, da se vsaj nekaj sredstev, ki so bila predvidena za pripravo osnutka in nadaljnje spremljanje zakonodaje, nameni učinkovitemu in pravilnemu izvajanju obstoječe zakonodaje Skupnosti v različnih enotah, ki se ukvarjajo s posameznimi pritožbami in primeri kršitev;
Insists that any reduction in the amount of legislation must be off-set by more emphasis on implementation; stresses that complaints are a cost-effective and efficient tool for monitoring the application of Community law and calls on the Commission to make sure that at least some of the resources previously allocated to the drafting and follow-up of legislation are dedicated to the effective and correct implementation of existing Community legislation in the various units dealing with individual complaints and infringement cases;
je prepričan, da morajo odbori Parlamenta nameniti pozornost tudi vprašanju uporabe zakonodaje Skupnosti, pri čemer morajo zlasti pristojni poročevalci pri spremjanju izvajanja prava Skupnosti v državah članicah igrati bolj dejavno vlogo, pri čemer lahko kot vzor služijo redne seje o izvajanju, ki jih pripravlja Odbor za okolje, javno zdravje in varno hrano;
Is convinced that Parliament's committees should also pay attention to the issue of the application of Community legislation, and in particular that the rapporteur responsible should play a more active role in monitoring the implementation of Community legislation in the Member States, whereby the regular sessions on implementation organised by the Committee for the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety can serve as an example;
razume, da se komitologije v tej resoluciji ne obravnava, in meni, da bi bilo treba to vprašanje obravnavati v posebni resoluciji;
Understands that comitology is not the subject of this resolution and maintains that the matter accordingly needs to be dealt with in a separate resolution;
poudarja, da nalaga člen 211 Pogodbe ES Komisiji institucionalno odgovornost za zagotavljanje izvajanja določb Pogodbe in ukrepov institucij v skladu s Pogodbo; nadalje poudarja, da člen 226 Pogodbe ES pooblašča Komisijo, da sprejme ukrepe proti državam članicam za kakršna koli neizpolnjevanja njihovih obveznosti v okviru Pogodbe;
Stresses that Article 211 of the EC Treaty assigns to the Commission institutional responsibility for ensuring the application of the provisions of the Treaty and of the measures taken by the institutions pursuant thereto, and that Article 226 of the EC Treaty empowers the Commission to take action against Member States for any failure to fulfil their obligations under the Treaty;
ugotavlja, da sta glavni težavi postopka za ugotavljanje kršitev (člena 226 in 228 Pogodbe ES) njegovo trajanje (povprečno 54 mesecev od prijave pritožbe in vložitve zadeve Sodišču) in omejena uporaba člena 228;
Notes that the main problems with the infringement procedure (Articles 226 and 228 of the EC Treaty) are its length (54 months elapsing on average from registration of the complaint to referral to the Court) and the limited use of Article 228;
ugotavlja, da Komisija organizira štiri srečanja na leto za odločanje o postopkih za ugotavljanje kršitev ter da vse odločitve (od prvega uradnega opomina, namenjenega pridobivanju informacij od zadevnih držav članic, do odločitve, da se obrnejo na Sodišče) sprejme kolegij komisarjev; ob upoštevanju pomena skupnega posredovanja pri fazah kršitve in potrebe po njem predlaga, da se pozorno oceni možnost skrajšanja notranjega postopka v začetni fazis 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;
Notes that the Commission organises four meetings a year to decide on infringement procedures and that all decisions (from the first letter of formal notice, aimed at obtaining information from the Member State concerned, to the decision to seise the Court of Justice) are taken by the College of Commissioners; whilst appreciating the relevance of, and the need for, collective intervention for the infringement phases, proposes that careful thought be given to the possibility of the internal procedure 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 or 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;
ugotavlja nezadostno stopnjo sodelovanja nacionalnih sodišč v večini držav članic, ki še vedno niso naklonjene izvajanju načela primarnosti prava Skupnosti;
Notes the insufficient level of cooperation by the national courts in most Member States, which are still reluctant to apply the principle of the primacy of Community law;
pozdravlja sporočilo Komisije z naslovom "Boljši nadzor uporabe prava Skupnosti" ( KOM(2002)0725 ), ki navaja različne ukrepe za dosego tega cilja;
Welcomes the Commission's Communication entitled "Better Monitoring of the application of Community law" ( COM(2002)0725 ), which sets out various actions to achieve its aim;
vseeno obžaluje, da Komisija ni predstavila nobenega strukturiranega, podrobnega nadaljnjega spremljanja nekaterih obveznosti, objavljenih v zgoraj navedenih sporočilih, kot na primer "uporaba prednostnih meril bo ocenjena letno, ko bo obravnavano poročilo o spremljanju uporabe prava Skupnosti";
Regrets nevertheless that the Commission has not presented any structured, detailed follow-up to some of the commitments announced in the above-mentioned Communications, such as the commitment 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";
poziva Komisijo, da izvede posebno oceno uporabe prednostnih meril, navedenih v zgoraj navedenem sporočilu z namenom ocenjevanja, ali je takšno opravljanje resnično potrebno in ne prinaša pretiranega zmanjšanja obsega postopkov za ugotavljanje kršitev, za katere Pogodba ne predvideva nobenega hierarhičnega razmerja; poziva Komisijo, da oceni, ali ne bi bila primernejša rešitev za izboljšanje zmogljivosti nadaljnjega spremljanja pritožb preprosto povečanje razpoložljivih sredstev v najbolj izpostavljenih generalnih direktoratih; poudarja, da v oddelkih Komisije, zadolženih za prenos zakonodaje, potrebujejo strokovnjake, ki bi preučili, če je bila zakonodaja v celoti prenesena; meni, da se pri preučevanju prenesene zakonodaje ni mogoče zanašati le na avtomatični sistem za preverjanje skladnosti;
Calls on the Commission to conduct a specific evaluation of the application of the priority criteria listed in the above-mentioned Communication, with the aim of assessing whether such an exercise is really needed and whether it may not risk reducing excessively the scope of infringement procedures, for which the Treaty does not provide any hierarchy; calls on the Commission to assess whether a simple increase in the available resources in the most exposed Directorates-General would not be a preferable solution with a view to improving the capacity to follow up complaints; points out that legal experts are needed in the Commission departments responsible for transposition to analyse whether legislation has been transposed in all its complexity; notes that it is not possible to rely solely on an automatic concordance system in order to analyse transpositions;
poziva Komisijo, da Parlament obvešča o rezultatih takšnih ocenjevanj; vztraja, da opredelitev prednostnih nalog ne sme povzročiti manjšega odziva na pritožbe državljanov, ter od Komisije zahteva, da se o vsaki morebitni spremembi prednostnih meril posvetuje s Parlamentom;
Calls on the Commission to keep Parliament informed of the results of such evaluations; insists that the definition of priorities should not lead to a decreased response to citizens" complaints and urges the Commission to consult Parliament on any possible change in the priority criteria;
poziva Komisijo, da umesti načelo pravne države in izkušnje državljanov nad izključno gospodarskimi merili in ocenjevanjem; zahteva od Komisije, da natančno nadzoruje upoštevanje temeljnih svoboščin in splošnih načel Pogodbe ter tudi upoštevanje uredb in okvirnih direktiv; poziva Komisijo, naj med kriteriji za ugotavljanje kršitev temeljnih svoboščin uporablja sekundarno zakonodajo;
Calls on the Commission to place the principle of the rule of law and citizens' experience above purely economic criteria and evaluations; urges the Commission to monitor carefully the respect of the fundamental freedoms and general principles of the Treaty as well as the respect of regulations and framework directives; invites the Commission to use secondary legislation as a criterion for determining whether there has been an infringement of fundamental freedoms;
zahteva od Komisije, da ponovno oceni sodelovanje z državami članicami v smislu člena 10 Pogodbe ES, glede na to, da večina držav članic še ni pripravljena storiti več za izboljšanje izvajanja prava Skupnosti, kar je bilo razvidno iz pogajanj o Medinstitucionalnem sporazumu z dne 16. decembra 2003 o boljši pripravi zakonodaje UL C 321, 31.12.2003, str.
Urges the Commission to re-evaluate cooperation with the Member States within the meaning of Article 10 of the EC Treaty, in light of the fact that most Member States are not prepared to do much to improve the implementation of Community law as was confirmed during the negotiations on the Interinstitutional Agreement of 16 December 2003 on better law-making OJ C 321, 31.12.2003, p.
, ko je Svet zavrnil sprejetje vsakršne obveze v zvezi s prenosom in izvajanjem zakonodaje; izraža svojo podporo za ponoven začetek dialoga s Svetom o tej zadevi, da bi spremenili medinstitucionalni sporazum;
, when the Council refused to make any commitment in matters concerning transposition and implementation; declares its support for re-opening negotiations with the Council on this issue, with a view to amending the Interinstitutional Agreement;
odločno poziva Komisijo, da ponovno oceni svojo popustljivost do držav članic, ko gre za upoštevanje rokov za oddajo zahtevanih informacij Komisiji, sprejetje in sporočanje izvedbenih nacionalnih ukrepov ter pravilno uporabo zakonodaje Skupnosti na nacionalni, regionalni in lokalni ravni;
Calls on the Commission seriously to reassess its indulgence of Member States when it comes to meeting deadlines for submitting requested information to the Commission, adopting and communicating national implementing measures and correctly applying Community legislation at national, regional and local levels;
ugotavlja, da so se države članice odločile za oblikovanje posebnih struktur, ki obravnavajo izvajanje; pozdravlja napore Komisije za podpiranje vzpostavitve ustreznih točk za usklajevanje v vsaki državi članici z namenom izboljšanja celotnega prenosa in izvajanja politike ter učinkovitosti predpravdnih postopkov za ugotavljanje kršitev; predlaga, da države članice ne vzpostavijo le tehnične strukture, ampak tudi imenujejo politično osebnost (politične osebnosti) na nacionalni ravni, odgovorno za politiko ugotavljanja kršitev;
Notes that the Member States have decided to set up specific structures dealing with implementation; welcomes the Commission's efforts in supporting the setting-up of appropriate coordination points in each Member State, with the aim of improving the entire transposition and implementation policy and the efficiency of the pre-litigation stage of infringement proceedings; suggests that the Member States should not only establish technical structures but also appoint political figure(s) responsible at national level for infringement policy;
opozarja, da poudarek na organizacijskih vprašanjih in pretoku informacij ne sme prikriti dejstva, da so številni primeri nepravilnega izvajanja posledica slabe kakovosti zakonodaje in namernih poskusov držav članic, da bi iz političnih, upravnih in gospodarskih razlogov izpodbile zakonodajo Skupnosti; v zvezi s tem dodaja, da ima Komisija navado sprejemati zapoznelo ukrepanje držav članic, da bi tako zaključili postopke za primer kršitev; poziva 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 ES;
Points out that emphasis on organisational issues and communication flows should not hide the fact that many cases of incorrect implementation are the result of poor-quality legislation and reflect Member States' deliberate efforts to undermine Community legislation for political, administrative and economic reasons; in this connection, notes that the Commission is in the habit of accepting late intervention by the Member States in order to close infringement proceedings; calls on the Commission to ask the 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;
ugotavlja, da se je omrežje SOLVIT (Internal Market Problem Solving) na notranjem trgu pokazalo kot učinkovit dopolnilni zunajsodni mehanizem, ki je povečal prostovoljno sodelovanje med državami članicami, vendar meni, da se teh mehanizmov ne sme obravnavati kot nadomestilo za postopke za ugotavljanje kršitev, ki zavezujejo države članice k izvajanju zakonodaje Skupnosti; poziva države članice, naj nacionalnim kontaktnim točkam za mrežo SOLVIT namenijo več finančnih sredstev in človeških virov;
Notes that the Internal Market Problem Solving System (SOLVIT network) has proved its effectiveness in the internal market as a complementary non-judicial mechanism which has increased voluntary cooperation among Member States, but considers that such mechanisms should not be regarded as a substitute for infringement proceedings which are designed to oblige the Member States to apply Community legislation; calls on the Member States to make allocate greater human and financial resources to their national contact points for the SOLVIT network;
meni, da je za zakonodajo bistveno, da je pripravljena na način, prijaznejši za izvrševanje; meni, da je prav tako pomembno, da državljani bolje razumejo zakonodajo Skupnosti, in zato predlaga, naj se vsem pravnim aktom doda povzetek za državljane v obliki razumljive in poljudne obrazložitve;
Considers it essential for legislation to be drafted in a way that is more enforcement-friendly; considers it equally important to improve citizens' understanding of Community legislation and therefore proposes that a citizen's summary be included in the form of a non-legalistic explanatory statement accompanying all legislative acts;
je prepričan, da čeprav je pomembno posvetiti čas in trud za razvijanje dialoga z državami članicami ter izboljšanje njim namenjene podpore za olajšanje hitrega in pravilnega prenosa zakonodaje Skupnosti, je potrebna strožja disciplina, predvsem po širitvi, da se preprečijo pretirane zamude in trajne razlike v kakovosti prenosa na nacionalni ravni;
Is convinced that, while it is important to devote time and effort to developing dialogue with Member States and improving the assistance afforded to them in order to facilitate swift, correct transposition of Community legislation, tighter discipline is necessary, notably after enlargement, in order to avoid excessive delays and persistent differences in the quality of national transposition;
verjame, da je treba posebno klavzulo, ki države članice obvezuje k oblikovanju tabele skladnosti ob prenosu direktiv, bolj sistematično vključiti v vsako novo sprejeto direktivo;
Believes that a specific clause obliging Member States to draft a concordance table when transposing directives should be inserted systematically into each newly adopted directive;
ugotavlja, da je v letu 2004 približno 41 % novih direktiv vključevalo določbo o tabeli skladnosti; verjame, da mora Parlament kot sozakonodajalec podpreti predloge, da bi v direktive vključili določbe, ki države članice obvezujejo k uporabi tabele skladnosti za obveščanje; poziva Komisijo, da Parlamentu redno poroča o uporabi takšnih določb;
Notes that in 2004 about 41% of new directives included provision for a concordance table; believes that the European Parliament, as co-legislator, should support proposals to introduce into directives provisions obliging the Member States to use the concordance table for notification; calls on the Commission to report to Parliament regularly on the application of such provisions;
pozdravlja prizadevanje nekaterih generalnih direktoratov Komisije, predvsem GD za okolje, za izboljšanje preverjanj skladnosti ustreznih direktiv, zlasti po širitvi; poziva Komisijo, da na svoji spletni strani objavi študije o ocenjevanju skladnosti nacionalnih izvedbenih ukrepov z zakonodajo Skupnosti, ki so jih zahtevali različni generalni direktorati;
Welcomes the effort made by some Directorates-General of the Commission – and notably DG Environment – to improve the conformity checks on the relevant directives, in particular following enlargement; calls 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;
ugotavlja, da obstaja več postopkov, ki so odprti za neskladnost, ter da se takšni postopki včasih ponovijo, ne da bi države članice uspeli prepričati, da spremenijo svoje akte o prenosu; poudarja, da lahko v takšnih primerih zamude v postopku zelo škodijo državljanom, ker pozornost ni usmerjena na posamezne primere, ampak k splošnemu problemu; zato poziva Komisijo, da o primerih neporočanja in neskladnosti izvedbenih nacionalnih ukrepov z zakonodajo Skupnosti zavzame ostro stališče ter da uporabi različne stopnje postopka, določenega v členu 226 Pogodbe ES, v skladu z določenimi roki, o katerih se ni mogoče pogajati in ki so zapisani v ustreznih nezavezujočih instrumentih (sporočila, smernice), da bi tako čim hitreje prišli do določitve kazni, predvidene v členu 228 Pogodbe ES;
Notes that there are several procedures available for dealing with non-conformity and that such procedures are sometimes repeated without attaining the objective of persuading the Member States to modify their transposition acts; stresses that in such cases delays in the procedure can be highly detrimental to citizens, because the focus is not on individual cases but rather reflects a general problem; therefore calls on the Commission to take a tough stance on cases of non-communication and non-conformity of national implementing measures with Community legislation and to move through the various stages of the procedure laid down by Article 226 of the EC Treaty in accordance with fixed, non-negotiable time-limits, laid down in appropriate soft-law instruments (communications, guidelines), in order to arrive as soon as possible at the imposition of fines pursuant to Article 228 of the EC Treaty;
poziva Komisijo, da predloži seznam tistih direktiv, ki imajo najslabši rezultat v smislu izvajanja, in poda mnenje o glavnih razlogih za to; poudarja, da so države članice v skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča in členom 10 PES dolžne zagotoviti ustrezen sistem učinkovitih in sorazmernih sankcij, ki bodo odvračale od kršitev predpisov Skupnosti; meni, da bi bilo treba v primeru, ko učinkovit sistem sankcij ni sprejet, primerno strogo ukrepati v skladu s postopkom za ugotavljanje kršitev;
Invites the Commission to present a list of those directives which have the worst record in terms of their implementation and to explain what it considers the underlying reasons for this to be; points out that, under the case-law of the Court of Justice and Article 10 of the EC Treaty, the Member States are required to ensure that an adequate system is in place for effective and proportionate sanctions, to act as a deterrent against infringement of Community provisions; considers that failure to adopt an effective system of sanctions should be pursued with due severity under the infringement procedure;
ugotavlja, da ti postopki državljanom ne dajejo nobene pravice, razen vložitve pritožbe, ter da ima Komisija v vlogi varuha Pogodbe veliko diskrecije glede tega, ali naj prijavi pritožbo in začne postopke; meni, da v Pogodbi ali sodni praksi sodišča ni ničesar, kar bi preprečevalo uporabo ustreznih zakonodajnih instrumentov, ki bi dali več pravic pritožnikom, zato poziva Komisijo, naj sprejme tovrstne instrumente; je prepričan, da mora ta pomembna in posebna pravica Komisije zadovoljevati merilom preglednosti in odgovornosti glede sprejemanja odločitev, predvsem v primerih neprijave pritožb;
Notes that the present procedures give citizens no rights beyond lodging a complaint and that the Commission, in its role as guardian of the Treaty, has a broad discretion as to whether to register a complaint and start proceedings; considers that there is nothing in the Treaty or the case-law of the Court of Justice to prevent the use of appropriate legislative instruments to give further rights to complainants, and therefore calls on the Commission to take steps to adopt such instruments; is convinced that this important and exclusive prerogative should correspond to a duty of transparency and accountability as to the reasons why decisions are taken, notably decisions not to pursue complaints;
pozdravlja sporočilo Komisije Evropskemu parlamentu in evropskemu varuhu človekovih pravic o "odnosih s pritožnikom v zvezi s kršitvami zakonodaje Skupnosti" (KOM (2002)0141);
Welcomes the Commission's Communication to the European Parliament and the European Ombudsman on "Relations with the complainant in respect of infringements of Community law" ( COM(2002)0141 );
zahteva od Komisije, da upošteva načela, navedena v tem sporočilu, da je treba vse pritožbe, ki bi lahko naznanile resnično kršitev prava Skupnosti in jih je prejela Komisija, brez izjeme prijaviti, razen v primerih izrednih okoliščin, navedenih v členu 3 Priloge k Sporočilu; ugotavlja, da je evropski varuh človekovih pravic nedavno prejel posebne pritožbe o neprijavljanju pritožb in jih zdaj preučuje; poziva Komisijo, naj Parlamentu predloži redno poročilo o primerih neprijavljanja pritožb v skladu z zgoraj navedenim sporočilom;
Urges the Commission to respect the principles stated in that Communication to the effect that all complaints likely to denounce a real violation of Community law that are received by the Commission should be registered, without any selection, unless they fall within the exceptional circumstances referred to in point 3 of the Annex to the Communication; notes that the European Ombudsman has recently received specific complaints denouncing the non-registration of complaints and is currently investigating them; calls on the Commission to submit a regular report to Parliament on cases of non-registration of complaints in line with the above-mentioned Communication;