natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Sodba z dne 29. junija 2010 v zadevi C-28/08 P, Komisija proti Bavarian Lager , še ni objavljena v ZOdl. , Volker und Marcus Schecke (združeni zadevi C-92/09 in C-93/09)
Judgment of 29 June 2010 in case C-28/08 P, Commission v Bavarian Lager , not yet published in the ECR. , Volker und Marcus Schecke (joined cases C-92/09 and C-93/09)
Sodba z dne 9. novembra 2010 v združenih zadevah C-92/09 P in C-93/09 P, Volker in Markus Schecke GbR in Hartmut Eifert proti Land Hessen , še ni objavljena v ZOdl. , Technische Glaswerke Ilmenau – TGI (C-139/07 P)
Judgment of 9 November 2010 in joined cases C-92/09 P and C-93/09 P, Volker und Markus ScheckeGbR and Hartmut Eifert v Land Hessen , not yet published in the ECR. , Technische Glaswerke Ilmenau - TGI (C-139/07 P)
Sodba z dne 29. junija 2010 v zadevi C-139/07 P, Komisija proti Technische Glaswerke Ilmenau, še ni objavljena v ZOdl. in API (združene zadeve C-514/07 P, C-528/07 P in C-532/07 P)
Judgment of 29 June 2010 in case C-139/07 P, Commission v Technische Glaswerke Ilmenau , not yet published in the ECR. and API (joined cases C-514/07 P, C-528/07 P and C-532/07 P)
Sodba z dne 21. septembra 2010 v združenih zadevah C-514/07 P, C-528/07 P in C-532/07 P, Švedska in API proti Komisiji , še ni objavljena v ZOdl. , ter sodb Splošnega sodišča v zadevah Access Info Europe (T-233/09)
Judgment of 21 September 2010 in joined cases C-514/07 P, C-528/07 P and C-532/07 P, Sweden , and API v Commission , not yet published in the ECR. , and to the judgments of the General Court in the cases of Access Info Europe (T-233/09)
Sodba z dne 22. marca 2010 v zadevi T-233/09, Access Info Europe proti Svetu , še ni objavljena v ZOdl. , MyTravel (zadeva T-403/05)
Judgment of 22 March 201 in case T-233/09, Access Info Europe v Council , not yet published in the ECR. , MyTravel (case T-403/05)
II-2027. , Borax (zadevi T-121/05 in T-166/05)
II-2027. , Borax (cases T-121/05 and T-166/05)
II-27. , Joséphidès (zadeva T-439/08)
II-27. , Joséphidès (case T-439/08)
Sodba z dne 21. oktobra 2010 v zadevi T-439/08, Agapiou Joséphidès proti Komisiji in EACEA , še ni objavljena v ZOdl. , Co-Frutta (združeni zadevi T-355/04 in T-446/04)
Judgment of 21 October 2010 in case T-439/08, Agapiou Joséphidès v Commission and EACEA , not yet published in the ECR. , Co-Frutta (joined cases T-355/04 and T-446/04)
II-1. , Terezakis (zadeva T-380/04)
II-1. , Terezakis (case T-380/04)
II-11. , Agrofert Holdings (zadeva T-111/07)
II-11. , Agrofert Holdings (case T-111/07)
Sodba z dne 7. julija 2010 v zadevi T-111/07, Agrofert Holding proti Komisiji , še ni objavljena v ZOdl. in Editions Jacob (zadeva T-237/05)
Judgment of 7 July 2010 in Case T-111/07, Agrofert Holding v Commission , not yet published in the ECR. and Editions Jacob (case T-237/05)
Sodba z dne 9. junija 2010 v zadevi T-237/05, Éditions Jacob proti Komisiji , še ni objavljena v ZOdl. ,
Judgment of 9 June 2010 in Case T-237/05, Éditions Jacob v Commission , not yet published in the ECR. ,
– ob upoštevanju dejavnosti in dokumentov, ki sta jih pripravila evropski varuh človekovih pravic in evropski nadzornik za varstvo podatkov, prvi glede vprašanja dostopa do dokumentov, drugi pa glede ustreznega ravnotežja med preglednostjo in varstvom podatkov,
– having regard to the activities and documents produced by the European Ombudsman on the issue of access to documents, as well as by the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) regarding the fair balance between transparency and data protection,
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije z dne 30. aprila 2008 o Uredbi Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o dostopu javnosti do dokumentov Evropskega parlamenta, Sveta in Komisije ( KOM(2008)0229 ),
– having regard to the Commission proposal of 30 April 2008 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents ( COM(2008)0229 ),
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije z dne 20. marca 2011 o uredbi Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 1049/2001 o dostopu javnosti do dokumentov Evropskega parlamenta, Sveta in Komisije ( KOM(2011)0137 ),
– having regard to the Commission proposal of 20 March 2011 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents ( COM(2011)0137 ),
– ob upoštevanju Konvencije UNECE iz leta 1998 o dostopu do informacij, udeležbi javnosti pri odločanju in dostopu do pravnega varstva v okoljskih zadevah (aarhuška konvencija),
– having regard to the 1998 UNECE Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention),
– ob upoštevanju Konvencije Sveta Evrope o dostopu do uradnih dokumentov iz leta 2008,
– having regard to the 2008 Council of Europe Convention on Access to Official Documents,
– ob upoštevanju letnih poročil Sveta, Komisije in Evropskega parlamenta o dostopu do dokumentov za leti 2009 in 2010 v skladu s členom 17 Uredbe (ES) št. 1049/2001,
– having regard to the Annual Reports for 2009 and 2010 from the Council, the Commission and the European Parliament on access to documents, in accordance with Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001,
– ob upoštevanju Okvirnega sporazuma iz leta 2010 o odnosih med Evropskim parlamentom in Evropsko komisijo
– having regard to the 2010 Framework Agreement on Relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission
– ob upoštevanju Medinstitucionalnega sporazuma z dne 20. novembra 2002 med Evropskim parlamentom in Svetom o dostopu Evropskega parlamenta do informacij Sveta s področja varnostne in obrambne politike, ki so občutljive narave
– having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 November 2002 between the European Parliament and the Council concerning access by the European Parliament to sensitive information of the Council in the field of security and defence policy
– ob upoštevanju svojih prejšnjih resolucij z dne 14. januarja 2009 o dostopu javnosti do dokumentov Evropskega parlamenta, Sveta in Komisije
– having regard to its previous resolutions of 14 January 2009 on public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents
80. , 25. novembra 2010 o letnem poročilu o dejavnostih Evropskega varuha človekovih pravic za leto 2009
80. , 25 November 2010 on the annual report on the European Ombudsman’s activities in 2009
Sprejeta besedila, P7_TA(2010)0435 . , 17. decembra 2009 o potrebnem izboljšanju pravnega okvira o dostopu do dokumentov po začetku veljavnosti Lizbonske pogodbe, Uredba (ES) št. 1049/2001
Texts Adopted, P7_TA(2010)0435 . , and 17 December 2009 on improvements needed to the legal framework for access to documents following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001
UL C 286 E, 22.10.2010, str.
OJ C 286 E, 22.10.2010, p.
– ob upoštevanju členov 48 in 104(7) svojega poslovnika,
– having regard to Rule 48 and Rule 104(7) of its Rules of Procedure,
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za državljanske svoboščine, pravosodje in notranje zadeve ( A7-0245/2011 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs ( A7-0245/2011 ),
A. ker je Lizbonska pogodba uvedla nov ustavni okvir za institucionalno preglednost EU v smislu odprte, učinkovite in neodvisne evropske uprave (člen 298 PDEU), saj je uvedla robustno temeljno pravico do dostopa do dokumentov institucij, organov, uradov in agencij EU; ker je treba to pravico, ki jo Pogodba priznava ne le državljanom Unije, temveč vsem fizičnim in pravnim osebam s stalnim prebivališčem v državah članicah, uveljavljati ob upoštevanju splošnih načel in omejitev (zaradi varovanja nekaterih javnih in zasebnih interesov), ki jih določajo uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta (člen 15 PDEU),
A. whereas the Lisbon Treaty introduced a new constitutional framework of EU institutional transparency, with a view to an open, efficient and independent European administration (Article 298 TFEU), by establishing a firm fundamental right of access to documents of EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies; whereas this right is afforded by the Treaty not only to EU citizens but also to any natural or legal person residing in a Member State, and should be exercised in compliance with the general principles and limits (set with a view to protecting certain public or private interests) laid down by the regulations adopted by the European Parliament and the Council (Article 15 TFEU),
B. ker zdaj na splošno velja, da mora biti dostop do zakonodajnih dokumentov popoln, izjeme glede nezakonodajnih dokumentov je treba omejiti, ta pristopa pa se medsebojno ne smeta ovirati,
B. whereas it is now a general rule that access to legislative documents should be fully provided, while exceptions regarding non-legislative documents should be narrowed, and whereas the two approaches should not undermine each other,
C. ker novi Pogodbi ne vključujeta več navedbe nujnosti ohranjanja učinkovitosti njegovih postopkov odločanja (člena 255 in 207(3) nekdanje PES), t. i. prostor za razmislek, kot možnosti za omejevanje preglednosti v zvezi z zakonodajnimi postopki; ker bi bilo treba za upravne postopke ta prostor za razmislek uokviriti v skladu s členom 1 PEU in členom 298 PDEU, ki zahtevata odprto, učinkovito in neodvisno upravo,
C. whereas the new Treaties no longer mention ‘the preserving of the effectiveness of the Council’s decision-making process’ (Articles 255 and 207 (3) of the former TEC) – the so-called ‘space to think’ – as a possible limit to transparency as far as legislative procedures are concerned; whereas for administrative procedures the ‘space to think’ should be framed in line with Article 1 TEU and Article 298 TFEU, which require an open, efficient and independent administration,
D. ker je preglednost bistven del participativne demokracije, ki dopolnjuje predstavniško demokracijo, na katerih temelji delovanje Unije, kot je izrecno določeno v členih 9 do 11 PEU, saj se s tem državljanu omogoča sodelovanje pri odločanju ter izvajanje javnega nadzora in s tem zagotavljanje legitimnosti demokratičnega političnega sistema,
D. whereas transparency is an essential part of participatory democracy, being complementary to representative democracy, on which the functioning of the Union is based, as explicitly stated in Articles 9-11 TEU, allowing the citizen to participate in decision-making and to exercise public scrutiny, and thus ensuring the legitimacy of a democratic political system,
E. ker državljani zahtevajo več demokracije, preglednosti in odprtosti institucij in političnih akterjev ter okrepljen boj proti korupciji; ker je dostop do dokumentov in informacij eden od načinov vključevanja državljanov v demokratični proces ter preprečevanja korupcije in boja proti njej,
E. whereas citizens are calling for more democracy, transparency, openness of institutions and of political actors and a stronger fight against corruption; whereas access to documents and information is one of the ways to make sure citizens can be involved in the democratic process and that corruption is prevented and fought,
F. ker poleg tega EU vse pogosteje tvega, da postane tarča kritik, ker državljanom ne zagotavlja zadostne preglednosti, odprtosti ter dostopa do dokumentov in informacij, kot je razvidno iz dejstva, da ni bilo mogoče sprejeti nove uredbe o pravici do dostopa do dokumentov, ker Komisija ni sprejela sprememb, ki jih je predlagal Parlament, in države članice niso bili pripravljene razkriti svojih dokumentov, razprav in posvetovanj državljanom in Parlamentu,
F. whereas furthermore the EU progressively risks to become the target of criticism because of the continuous lack of transparency, openness and access to documents and information for citizens, as demonstrated by the impossibility to adopt a new Regulation on the right of access to documents, due to the Commission refusal to accept Parliament’s amendments and Member States’ unwillingness to open up their documents, discussions and deliberations to citizens and the Parliament,
G. ker bi bilo treba na ravni EU sprejeti nove in strožje ukrepe proti korupciji za zagotovitev, da se ne bi pojavljala v nobeni evropski instituciji, Parlament pa bi moral upoštevati nedavne negativne izkušnje in oblikovati pravila glede odnosov svojih poslancev in uslužbencev z lobisti in interesnimi skupinami, vključno z zahtevo po večji preglednosti,
G. whereas further and more stringent measures against corruption should be taken at EU level to ensure that EU institutions are immune from it, at all levels and everywhere, and whereas Parliament should learn from recent negative experiences by drawing up rules, including rules providing for enhanced transparency, on the relations of MEPs and Parliament’s staff with lobbyists and interest groups,
H. ker imajo državljani zaradi zagotavljanja odgovornosti in legitimnosti demokratičnega političnega sistema pravico vedeti, kako delujejo njihovi predstavniki, izvoljeni ali imenovani v javne organe, oziroma kako zastopajo države članice na evropski ali mednarodni ravni (načelo odgovornosti), kako deluje postopek odločanja (vključno z dokumenti, predlogi sprememb, časovnimi razporedi, udeleženci, oddanimi glasovi itd.) ter kako in s kakšnimi rezultati se javni denar dodeljuje in porablja (načelo sledljivosti sredstev),
H. whereas, in order to guarantee the accountability and legitimacy of a democratic political system, citizens have a right to know how their representatives act, once elected or appointed to public bodies or representing the Member States at European or international level (principle of accountability), how the decision-making process works (including documents, amendments, timetable, players involved, votes cast, etc), and how public money is allocated and spent, and with what results (principle of traceability of funds),
I. ker trenutno veljavna Uredba (ES) št. 1049/2001 ne vsebuje jasnih opredelitev nekaterih pomembnih vprašanj, kot so pravica držav članic do veta, omejitve „prostora za razmislek“, jasna in omejena opredelitev izjem, dodeljevanje kategorij zaupnosti dokumentov ter ravnotežje med preglednostjo in varstvom podatkov,
I. whereas the current Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 does not provide clear definitions of several important issues, such as Member States’ veto right, limitations of the ‘space to think’, clear and narrow definition of the exceptions, classification of documents, and equilibrium between transparency and data protection,
J. ker je EU z začetkom veljavnosti Lizbonske pogodbe dobila nove pristojnosti na področju kazenskega prava (člena 82 in 83 PDEU) in sodelovanja policijskih organov; ker bi lahko tovrstne nove pristojnosti vplivale na temeljne človekove pravice in poudarjajo potrebo po bolj odprtem zakonodajnem postopku,
J. whereas with the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty the EU acquired new competences in the fields of criminal law (Articles 82 and 83 TFEU) and police cooperation; whereas such new competences could affect basic human rights and highlight the need for a more open legislative procedure,
K. ker člen 15 PDEU in člen 42 Listine temeljnih pravic uvajata širok koncept dokumenta, ki zajema informacije ne glede na nosilec, na katerem so shranjene,
K. whereas Article 15 TFEU and Article 42 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights introduce a broad notion of the term ‘document’ which covers information whatever its medium of storage,
L. ker izvajanje Uredbe (ES) št. 1049/2001 ni enakomerno, saj statistike kažejo razlike med posameznimi institucijami; ker količinski podatki v poročilih za leto 2009 o izvajanju Uredbe (ES) št. 1049/2001 v institucijah EU kažejo na splošno zmanjšanje števila in deleža zavrnitev, na 12 %
L. whereas the application of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 is not uniform as statistics show a variation between different institutions; whereas quantitative data contained in the Annual Reports for 2009 in relation to the application of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 by the EU institutions suggest a general decrease in the number and rate of refusals, to 12 %
9 % leta 2010.
9 % in 2010.
(16 % leta 2008) v Parlamentu (33 primerov), 22,5 %
(16 % in 2008) in Parliament (33 cases), 22.5 %
36,1 % brez delno razkritih dokumentov.
36.1 % without the partially disclosed documents.
Leta 2010 je bil delež zavrnitev 13,3 % (29,1 % brez delno razkritih dokumentov).
In 2010 the refusal rate was 13.3 % (29.1 % without the partially disclosed documents).
(28 % leta 2008) v Svetu (2254 primerov) in 11,65 % (13,99 % leta 2008) v Komisiji (589 primerov), institucije EU pa so v letu 2009 za zavrnitev navajale različne razloge, od katerih je bil eden najpogosteje navedenih zaščita postopka odločanja (Parlament (39,47 %
(28 % in 2008) in the Council (2254 cases) and 11.65 % (13.99 % in 2008) in the Commission (589 cases), while reasons for refusal varied among EU institutions in 2009, one of the most used exceptions being the protection of the decision-making process (Parliament (39.47 %
37 % leta 2010. ), Svet (39,2 % za začetne prošnje)
37 % in 2010. ), Council (39.2 % for initial applications)
33 % leta 2010 za začetne prošnje. in Komisija (26 %))
33 % in 2010 for initial applications. , and Commission (26 %))
Drugi pogosti razlogi v letu 2009 so bili: za Evropski parlament varstvo zasebnosti (26 %) in zaščita namena pregledov, preiskav in revizij (15 %), za Svet (začetne prošnje) varstvo javnega interesa, kar zadeva mednarodne odnose (22,7 %), javno varnost (5,6 %) ter obrambne in vojaške zadeve (3,5 %), za Komisijo pa zaščita pregledov (27,6 %) in poslovnih interesov (13,99 %). ,
Other main reasons in 2009 were: for the European Parliament the protection of privacy (26 %) and protection of the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits (15 %), for the Council (initial applications) the protection of public interests as regards international relations (22.7 %), public security (5.6 %), and defence and military matters (3,5 %), and for the Commission (initial applications) the protection of inspections (27.6 %) and of commercial interests (13,99 %). ,
M. ker je Splošno sodišče v zadevi Toland proti Parlamentu
M. whereas the General Court in the case Toland v Parliament
Sodba z dne 7. junija 2011 v zadevi T-471/08, Toland proti Parlamentu , še ni objavljena v ZOdl. preklical odločitev Evropskega parlamenta o zavrnitvi dostopa do poročila službe za notranjo revizijo z dne 9. januarja 2008 o reviziji nadomestila za parlamentarno pomoč,
Judgment of 7 June 2011 in case T-471/08, Toland v Parliament , not yet published in the ECR. annulled the decision of the European Parliament refusing access to an Internal Audit Service report of 9 January 2008 entitled ‘Audit of the Parliamentary Assistance Allowance’,
N. ker Komisija in Parlament v letu 2009 v svoja registra nista vnesla nobenega takšnega dokumenta, Svet pa je od 445 dokumentov, označenih za občutljive, v svoj register vnesel 157 dokumentov z oznako ‘CONFIDENTIEL UE’ ali ‘SECRET UE’,
N. whereas, as regards sensitive documents, in 2009 the Commission and Parliament did not enter any such documents in their registers, while the Council entered 157 sensitive documents classified ‘CONFIDENTIEL UE’ or ‘SECRET UE’ out of 445 documents classified in that way,
O. ker imajo mednarodni sporazumi v pravnem redu EU podobne pravne učinke kot notranja zakonodaja EU, javnost pa mora biti o teh sporazumih obveščena in imeti mora dostop do dokumentov v zvezi z njimi,
O. whereas international agreements have legal effects in the EU legal order similar to those of EU internal legislation, and whereas the public should be informed of the international agreements and be granted access to documents relating to them,
P. ker Uredba (ES) št. 1049/2001 zavezuje institucije, da predvidijo delni dostop do dokumenta, če samo za nekatere njegove dele velja izjema; ker je odobreni delni dostop pogosto neupravičeno omejen samo na naslov ali uvodne odstavke dokumentov, dostop do vsebinskih odstavkov pa je onemogočen,
P. whereas Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 establishes an obligation for the institutions to consider partial access to a document if only some parts of it are covered by an exception; whereas the partial access granted is often unduly limited and only extends to the title or the introductory paragraphs of the documents, while access to the substantive paragraphs is denied,
Q. ker člen 41 listine o temeljnih pravicah opredeljuje „pravico vsake osebe do vpogleda v svoj spis ob spoštovanju legitimnih interesov zaupnosti ter poklicne in poslovne tajnosti“; ker je uveljavljanje te pravice še vedno močno pomanjkljivo, zaradi česar se je treba za pridobitev vpogleda v lasten spis nujno sklicevati na predpise o javnem dostopu,
Q. whereas Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights establishes ‘the right of every person to have access to his or her file, while respecting the legitimate interests of confidentiality and of professional and business secrecy’; and whereas serious gaps in the implementation of this right persist, which creates pressure to invoke rules of public access to gain access to one’s own file,
R. ker člen 15 PDEU jasno določa obveznost institucij, organov, uradov in agencij Unije, da „pri svojem delu kar najbolj upoštevajo načelo javnosti delovanja“; ker ta obveznost velja tudi za odbore, ki pomagajo Komisiji pri njenih nalogah; ker se ta obveznost ne upošteva v standardnem poslovniku Komisije za odbore, ki določa, da so vse razprave in dokumenti v zvezi s postopki komitologije zaupni;
R. whereas Article 15 TFEU establishes a clear obligation for all Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies to ‘conduct their work as openly as possible’; whereas this obligation also applies to the committees assisting the Commission in its duties; whereas this obligation is not respected in the Commission’s standard rules of procedure for committees, which stipulate that all committee discussions and documents relating to ‘comitology’ procedures are to be confidential;
Dostop do dokumentov kot temeljna pravica
Access to documents as a fundamental right
2. meni, da bi morala biti EU v ospredju in vzor za države članice in za tretje države glede institucionalne preglednosti in moderne demokracije;
Considers that the EU should stand at the forefront, providing a model of institutional transparency and modern democracy for the Member States as well as for third countries;
4. poziva institucije, organe, urade in agencije EU, vključno z novoustanovljeno evropsko službo za zunanje delovanje, naj začnejo nemudoma in v celoti izvajati Uredbo (ES) št. 1049/2001, kot določajo Pogodbe, in s tem v zvezi vsako leto objavijo poročilo, kot določa člen 17 navedene uredbe;
Calls on all the EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies, including the newly created European External Action Service, to immediately and fully apply Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 as required by the Treaties, and to publish in that regard an annual report as required by Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001;
6. meni, da je treba revidirati Uredbo (ES) št. 1049/2001, da bi razjasnili nekatere določbe v njej, natančno opredelili in omejili izjeme ter zagotovili, da te izjeme ne bodo spodkopavale preglednosti, ki jo zagotavljajo Pogodbe in Listina temeljnih pravic; meni, da bi morala ta revizija okrepiti pravico dostopa do dokumentov, ne da bi zniževala sedanje standarde, ki varujejo to pravico, pri tem pa bi bilo treba upoštevati sodno prakso Sodišča; v zvezi s tem poudarja, da bi morala biti spremenjena uredba preprosta in dostopna državljanom, da bi lahko učinkovito uveljavljali svojo pravico;
Considers it necessary to revise Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 in order to clarify some of its provisions, precisely define and narrow its exceptions and ensure that these exceptions do not undermine the transparency granted by the Treaties and the Charter; sees that this revision should strengthen the right of access to documents, without in any way reducing the existing standards for the protection of that right, and take into consideration the case-law of the Court of Justice; stresses in this context that the revised Regulation should be simple and accessible to citizens, to enable them to effectively use their right;