natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
pozdravlja izredno dobre odnose med varuhom človekovih pravic in Odborom za peticije znotraj institucionalnega okvira, ko gre za medsebojno spoštovanje posameznih pristojnosti; spodbuja prakso, da je na vseh sejah Odbora za peticije navzoč predstavnik varuha človekovih pravic, ki jo je varuh že uvedel;
Welcomes the excellent relationship between the Ombudsman and the Committee on Petitions within the institutional framework as regards reciprocal respect for their competences; favours the continuation of the practice already established by the Ombudsman of sending a representative to each meeting of the Committee on Petitions;
ceni ključen prispevek, ki ga k spoštovanju načela subsidiarnosti prinaša evropska mreža varuhov človekovih pravic, ki ima 94 uradov v 32 državah in katere član je tudi Odbor za peticije; pozdravlja sodelovanje evropskega varuha človekovih pravic z varuhi človekovih pravic in podobnimi organi na nacionalni, regionalni in lokalni ravni v posameznih državah članicah;
Recognises the vital contribution made by the European Network of Ombudsmen, represented by 94 offices in 32 countries, of which the Committee on Petitions is a member, in line with the principle of subsidiarity; welcomes the collaboration between the European Ombudsman and ombudsmen and similar bodies at national, regional and local levels in the Member States;
je seznanjen z dejstvom, da je varuh človekovih pravic leta 2009 prejel 3098 pritožb in da je bilo v tem času zaključenih 318 preiskav;
Notes that the Ombudsman registered 3098 complaints in 2009 and that 318 inquiries were completed and concluded during that year;
je zadovoljen z velikim številom postopkov, ki so se zaključili s sporazumnim dogovorom ali jih je rešila zadevna institucija (56 %), kar kaže na konstruktivno sodelovanje med varuhom človekovih pravic ter institucijami in organi Unije; spodbuja varuha človekovih pravic ter institucije in organe Unije, naj si še naprej prizadevajo v tej smeri;
Welcomes the large number of procedures concluded by an amicable resolution or by the institution concerned (56 %), which bears witness to the constructive cooperation which exists between the Ombudsman and the institutions and bodies of the Union; encourages the Ombudsman and the institutions and bodies of the Union to continue to apply this approach;
je prav tako zadovoljen s prizadevanji varuha človekovih pravic, da skrajša povprečno trajanje svojih preiskav na devet mesecev; poziva k temu, da vse institucije in organi EU prejmejo proračunska sredstva in osebje, ki ga potrebujejo za hitro obravnavo pritožb in peticij;
Welcomes the Ombudsman's endeavours which resulted in his shortening the average length of his inquiries to nine months; calls for all EU institutions and bodies to be given the necessary budgetary and human resources to ensure that rapid action is taken in response to complaints and petitions;
je seznanjen z dejstvom, da se več kot tretjina preiskav, ki jih je varuh človekovih pravic začel leta 2009, nanaša na pomanjkanje preglednosti; zato zahteva, da sedanja revizija Uredbe (ES) št. 1049/2001 ne omeji obstoječe pravice le na dostop do informacij in dokumentov, temveč da se k vprašanju pristopi bolj proaktivno;
Notes that more than a third of the inquiries opened by the Ombudsman in 2009 concerned a lack of transparency; calls therefore for the current revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 not to restrict the existing right of access to information and documents but to adopt a more proactive approach;
je zadovoljen z napredkom, ki je bil v letu 2009 dosežen v zvezi z lažjim dostopom varuha človekovih pravic do zaupnih dokumentov Sveta;
Welcomes the progress made in 2009 as regards facilitating the Ombudsman's access to confidential Council documents;
je seznanjen s komunikacijsko strategijo in razvojem spletnih strani, ki sta po navedbah varuha človekovih pravic pomagala znižati število nedopustnih pritožb, ter varuha spodbuja, naj si še naprej prizadeva za obveščanje evropskih državljanov o svojih nalogah in mejah svojih pristojnosti ter o njihovih pravicah;
Notes the communication and website development strategy, which, according to the Ombudsman, has helped to cut the number of inadmissible complaints, and encourages the Ombudsman to continue his efforts to inform Europe's citizens about his role and the limits to his powers and about their rights;
se pridružuje mnenju varuha človekovih pravic, da je poleg zavezujočih pravil, ki jih mora spoštovati uprava, za dobro upravljanje bistven razvoj resnične kulture služenja državljanom; zato varuha poziva, naj sprejme še več pobud za spodbujanje te kulture v institucijah in pri državljanih;
Endorses the Ombudsman's opinion that, in addition to respect for the binding rules which apply to administrators, it is essential to develop a genuine tradition of service to the public in order to ensure good administration; calls on the Ombudsman, therefore, more often to take the initiative to promote such a tradition of service on the part of the European institutions and citizens;
obžaluje število pritožb, povezanih z nepotrebnimi zamudami pri beleženju pritožb, njihovi obravnavi in sprejetju sklepov; predlaga, da bi v okviru revizije finančne uredbe predvideli odškodnine za primere očitnih in daljših zamud;
Deplores the number of complaints concerning avoidable delays in registering requests, handling cases and taking decisions; proposes that the revision of the Financial Regulation should include provision for financial compensation in the event of manifest and prolonged delays;
ugotavlja, da je varuh človekovih pravic uspešno zaključil preiskavo na lastno pobudo v zvezi s predpisi, ki jih Komisija izvaja glede zahtev državljanov za vpogled v dokumente, povezane s postopki za ugotavljanje kršitev; spodbuja krepitev sodelovanja z Odborom za peticije in varuhu predlaga, naj ga redno obvešča o preiskavah, ki jih je začel na lastno pobudo, in o njihovih izidih; poziva Komisijo, naj sprejme bolj odprt in proaktiven pristop v zvezi z informacijami o postopkih za ugotavljanje kršitev;
Notes that the Ombudsman has completed an own-initiative inquiry into the rules which the Commission applies to applications by members of the public for access to documents concerning infringement proceedings; favours increased cooperation with the Committee on Petitions and suggests that the Ombudsman keep that Committee regularly informed about the own-initiative inquiries which he is conducting and the results thereof; calls on the Commission to adopt a more open and proactive attitude towards information about infringement proceedings;
ocenjuje, da služi kodeks dobrega ravnanja javnih uslužbencev, ki ga je oblikoval varuh človekovih pravic in ga je Parlament odobril v svoji resoluciji z dne 6. septembra 2001, kot vodilo in vir za zaposlene v vseh institucijah in organih Unije; je zadovoljen, da je kodeks odobril Evropski ekonomsko-socialni odbor; prav tako je zadovoljen, da je bil z Evropsko investicijsko banko podpisan memorandum o soglasju v zvezi z obravnavo pritožb; poziva varuha človekovih pravic, naj predvidi revizijo kodeksa na podlagi izkušenj zadnjih desetih let in naj na teh temeljih skrbi za spodbujanje in izmenjavo dobrih praks;
Considers that the Code of Good Administrative Behaviour proposed by the Ombudsman and approved by Parliament in its resolution of 6 September 2001 serves as a guide and resource for the staff of all Community institutions and bodies; welcomes the fact that the Code of Good Behaviour has been approved by the European Economic and Social Committee; welcomes the fact, also, that a Memorandum of Understanding has been concluded with the European Investment Bank concerning the handling of complaints; calls on the Ombudsman to consider revising the Code of Good Behaviour on the basis of the experience gained in the past 10 years and in that way to promote and exchange good practices;
obžaluje, da evropski varuh človekovih pravic nima pregleda nad pritožbami v zvezi z nepravilnostmi držav članic pri izvajanju prava Evropske unije, ki jih prejmejo nacionalni varuhi človekovih pravic; evropskemu varuhu človekovih pravic predlaga, naj se pritožbe združijo, da bi lahko bolje reševali probleme;
Regrets that complaints about the inadequate application by a Member State of EU law received by national ombudsmen are not recorded by the European Ombudsman; suggests that the European Ombudsman consider pooling them in order to facilitate better understanding of the problem;
poziva varuha človekovih pravic, naj nacionalne varuhe človekovih pravic spodbuja k rednemu sodelovanju z nacionalnimi parlamenti, po vzoru sodelovanja med evropskim varuhom človekovih pravic in Parlamentom;
Calls on the Ombudsman to encourage national ombudsmen to hold regular exchanges of views with their national parliaments, modelled on those which have been established between the European Ombudsman and Parliament;
poziva Evropsko komisijo k oblikovanju zakona o evropski upravi, ki bi veljal za vse organe, institucije in agencije Unije;
Calls on the Commission to draft a European administrative law common to all the bodies, institutions and agencies of the Union;
opozarja varuha človekovih pravic na nov postopek urada EPSO za izbor osebja in predlaga, naj se spremlja njegovo izvajanje ter opravi analiza;
Draws the attention of the Ombudsman to the new procedure for selection of staff by EPSO and suggests monitoring its application and analysing the developments observed;
podpira zamisel o vzpostavitvi skupnega intranetnega portala za vse člane evropske mreže varuhov človekovih pravic, da bi zagotovili redno objavljanje rezultatov;
Supports the idea of an intranet portal common to all members of the European Network of Ombudsmen in order to disseminate results regularly;
naroči svojemu predsedniku, naj to resolucijo in poročilo Odbora za peticije posreduje Svetu, Komisiji, evropskemu varuhu človekovih pravic, vladam in parlamentom držav članic ter njihovim varuhom človekovih pravic oziroma podobnim pristojnim organom.
Instructs its President to forward this resolution and the report of the Committee on Petitions to the Council, the Commission, the European Ombudsman, the governments and parliaments of the Member States and their ombudsmen or similar competent bodies.
Resolucija Evropskega parlamenta z dne 25. novembra 2010 o posebnem poročilu Evropskega varuha človekovih pravic Evropskemu parlamentu po osnutku priporočila Evropski komisiji v pritožbi št. 676/2008/RT ( 2010/2086(INI) )
European Parliament resolution of 25 November 2010 on the Special Report by the European Ombudsman following his draft recommendation to the European Commission in complaint 676/2008RT ( 2010/2086(INI) )
ob upoštevanju posebnega poročila Evropskega varuha človekovih pravic Evropskemu parlamentu, ki je bilo predloženo 24. februarja 2010,
having regard to the Special Report from the European Ombudsman to the European Parliament submitted on 24 February 2010,
ob upoštevanju drugega pododstavka člena 228(1) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije (nekdanji člen 195 PES),
having regard to Article 228(1), second subparagraph, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (ex Article 195 TEC),
ob upoštevanju členov 41(1), 42 in 43 Listine o temeljnih pravicah Evropske unije,
having regard to Articles 41(1), 42, and 43 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
, kakor je bil nazadnje spremenjen s Sklepom 2008/587/ES Evropskega parlamenta z dne 18. junija 2008 UL L 189, 17.7.2008, str.
, as last amended by Decision 2008/587/EC, Euratom of the European Parliament of 18 June 2008 OJ L 189, 17.7.2008, p.
ob upoštevanju sporočila Komisije Evropskemu parlamentu in Evropskemu varuhu človekovih pravic o odnosih s pritožnikom v zvezi s kršitvami zakonodaje Skupnosti UL C 244, 10.10.2002, str.
having regard to the Commission communication to the European Parliament and the European Ombudsman on relations with the complainant in respect of infringements of Community law OJ C 244, 10.10.2002, p.
ob upoštevanju prvega stavka člena 205(2) svojega poslovnika,
having regard to Rule 205(2), first sentence, of its Rules of Procedure,
ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za peticije ( A7-0293/2010 ),
having regard to the report of the Committee on Petitions ( A7-0293/2010 ),
ker je Evropski varuh človekovih pravic v skladu s členom 228 Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije pooblaščen za sprejemanje pritožb državljanov Unije glede primerov nepravilnosti pri dejavnostih institucij ali organov Unije,
whereas Article 228 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union empowers the European Ombudsman to receive complaints from any citizen of the Union concerning instances of maladministration in the activities of the Union institutions or bodies,
ker so pritožbe državljanov EU pomemben vir informacij o morebitnih kršitvah zakonodaje EU,
whereas complaints submitted by EU citizens constitute an important source of information on possible infringements of EU law,
ker ima v skladu s členom 41 Listine o temeljnih pravicah Evropske unije „[V]sakdo [...] pravico, da institucije, organi, uradi in agencije Unije njegove zadeve obravnavajo nepristransko, pravično in v razumnem roku“,
whereas, according to Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, ‘Every person has the right to have his or her affairs handled impartially, fairly and within a reasonable time by the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union’,
ker je 1. marca 2007 nevladna organizacija, ki deluje na področju varstva okolja, zaprosila Komisijo za dostop do informacij in dokumentov v posesti generalnega direktorata za podjetništvo in industrijo ter nekdanjega podpredsednika komisije, pristojnega za podjetništvo in industrijo, ki zadevajo srečanja med Komisijo in predstavniki proizvajalcev avtomobilov, na katerih se je razpravljalo o vprašanju pristopa Komisije do izpustov ogljikovega dioksida osebnih vozil,
whereas, on 1 March 2007, a non-governmental organisation acting in the field of environmental protection asked the Commission for access to information and documents held by the Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry and the former Vice-President of the Commission responsible for Enterprise and Industry, relating to meetings between the Commission and representatives of car manufacturers at which the issue of the Commission's approach to carbon dioxide emissions from cars had been discussed,
ker je Komisija dovolila dostop do 15 od 18 pisem, ki so bila poslana tedanjemu komisarju Günterju Verheugenu, zavrnila pa je dostop do treh pisem, ki jih je poslal nemški proizvajalec avtomobilov Porsche, z utemeljitvijo, da bi njihovo razkritje oslabilo varstvo poslovnih interesov družbe,
whereas the Commission granted access to 15 out of 18 letters sent to then-Commissioner Günter Verheugen, but refused access to three letters sent by the German car manufacturer Porsche on the grounds that their disclosure would undermine protection of the company's commercial interests,
ker člen 1(a) Uredbe (ES) št. 1049/2001 o dostopu javnosti do dokumentov Evropskega parlamenta, Sveta in Komisije določa, da je namen te uredbe zagotoviti čim širši dostop do dokumentov Evropskega parlamenta, Sveta in Komisije UL L 145, 31.5.2001, str.
whereas Article 1(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p.
, in ker je treba v skladu z uveljavljeno sodno prakso Sodišča Evropske unije strogo razlagati vsako odstopanje od tega načela,
provides that the aim of this regulation is to ensure the widest possible access to documents held by the Council, the European Parliament and the Commission, and whereas, according to the established case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, any exceptions to this principle must be interpreted strictly,
ker je komisija pritožniku zavrnila dostop do ustreznih pisem podjetja Porsche AG na podlagi prvega odstavka člena 4(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 1049/2001, ki določa, da „[I]nstitucije zavrnejo dostop do dokumenta, kadar bi razkritje oslabilo varstvo [...] poslovnih interesov fizičnih in pravnih oseb, vključno z intelektualno lastnino ...“,
whereas the Commission refused to grant the complainant access to the relevant letters from Porsche AG on the basis of the first paragraph of Article 4(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, which provides that ‘the institutions shall refuse access to a document where disclosure would undermine the protection of commercial interests of a natural or legal person, including intellectual property ...’,
ker je podjetje Porsche AG omenjena pisma poslalo v kontekstu posvetovanja Komisije s ključnimi zainteresiranimi stranmi glede revizije strategije Komisije za zmanjšanje emisij ogljikovega dioksida iz osebnih avtomobilov, ker je bilo zato verjetno, da tri pisma vsebujejo informacije o poslovnih odnosih podjetja Porsche AG, in ker bi jih Komisija zato lahko obravnavala, kot da sodijo v področje uporabe izjeme, določene v prvem odstavku člena 4(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 1049/2001,
whereas the letters in question were sent by Porsche AG in the context of the Commission's consultation of key stakeholders concerning the review of the Community strategy to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from passenger cars, whereas it was consequently likely that the three letters contained information on Porsche AG's business relations, and whereas the Commission could therefore have regarded them as falling within the scope of the exception laid down in Article 4(2), first paragraph, of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001,
, in ker je bil to primer nepravilnosti,
, and whereas this was an instance of maladministration,
ker je 27. oktobra 2008 varuh človekovih pravic pripravil osnutek priporočila za Komisijo, v katerem je opredelil podrobnosti svoje analize dejstev in pravne analize ter v njem navedel, da bi morala Komisija dovoliti dostop do treh pisem, ki jih je podjetje Porsche AG poslalo nekdanjemu podpredsedniku Komisije Günterju Verheugenu, v celoti ali razmisliti o njihovem delnem razkritju,
whereas, on 27 October 2008, the Ombudsman made a draft recommendation to the Commission setting out the details of his factual and legal analysis, in which he stated that the Commission should grant access to the three letters sent by Porsche AG to the former Vice-President, Günter Verheugen, in their entirety or consider partially disclosing them,
ker je varuh človekovih pravic na podlagi člena 195 PES (sedanji člen 228 PDEU) zaprosil Komisijo, naj v roku treh mesecev, torej do 31. januarja 2009, poda podrobno mnenje,
whereas the Ombudsman, on the basis of Article 195 EC (now Article 228 TFEU), asked the Commission to give a detailed opinion within three months, that is, by 31 January 2009,
ker Komisija v trimesečnem roku, določenem v členu 228 PDEU, ni podala mnenja, temveč je šestkrat zahtevala podaljšanje roka za predložitev svojega podrobnega poročila v odgovor na osnutek priporočila varuha človekovih pravic, in ker je julija in potem ponovno septembra 2009 varuh človekovih pravic obvestil sekretariat Komisije o svoji nameri, da Parlamentu predloži posebno poročilo, če ne prejme odgovora na osnutek priporočila,
whereas the Commission did not give its opinion within the three-month deadline provided for in Article 228 TFEU, but instead requested six extensions of the deadline for submitting its detailed opinion on the Ombudsman's draft recommendation, and whereas, in July and again in September 2009, the Ombudsman informed the Commission Secretariat of his intention to present a Special Report to Parliament if he did not receive an answer to his draft recommendation,
ker je nova Komisija, ko je nastopila mandat, dovolila dostop do pisem, vendar je do tega prišlo več kot 15 mesecev po tem, ko je bil izdan osnutek priporočila, namesto v treh mesecih, kot je določeno v statutu varuha človekovih pravic in v členu 228 PDEU,
whereas the new Commission, once it had had taken office, did indeed grant access to the letters, but whereas this occurred more than 15 months after the draft recommendation had been issued rather than the three months stipulated in the Ombudsman's Statute and in Article 228 TFEU,
ker je Komisija, s tem ko je pri preiskavi varuha človekovih pravic v zadevi 676/2008/RT odlagala svoj odgovor na osnutek priporočila za 15 mesecev, kršila svojo obveznost, da z njim sodeluje lojalno in v dobri veri, in ker to ne škodi le medinstitucionalnemu dialogu, temveč tudi javni podobi EU,
whereas the Commission, by delaying its reply to the draft recommendation for 15 months, breached its obligation to cooperate with the Ombudsman sincerely and in good faith during his inquiry into case 676/2008/RT, and whereas this is detrimental not only to interinstitutional dialogue, but also to the EU's public image,
ker je varuh človekovih pravic ugotovil zamude Komisije v še eni zadevi, ki vključuje dostop do dokumentov (355/2007(TN)FOR), v kateri bi morala Komisija predložiti svoje podrobno mnenje v odgovor na osnutek priporočila varuha človekovih pravic do 31. oktobra 2009, vendar do danes tega še ni storila,
whereas the Ombudsman has identified delays by the Commission in a further case involving access to documents (355/2007(TN)FOR), in which the Commission should have submitted its detailed opinion to the Ombudsman's draft recommendation by 31 October 2009, but has still not done so to date,
ker je Komisija odgovorila na pritožbe v prvotnem roku le v štirih od 22 primerov, ki jih je obravnaval varuh človekovih pravic v letu 2009 in so vključevali dostop do dokumentov; ker je v 14 od teh 22 primerov svoj odgovor predložila več kot 30 dni prepozno, v šestih primerih pa je svoj odgovor predložila vsaj 80 dni prepozno,
whereas the Commission met the original deadlines for replying to complaints in only four of the 22 cases involving access to documents dealt with by the Ombudsman in 2009; whereas in 14 of these 22 cases it submitted its reply more than 30 days late, and in six cases it submitted its reply at least 80 days late,
ker je naloga Evropskega parlamenta kot edinega izvoljenega organa EU varovanje in zaščita neodvisnosti Evropskega varuha človekovih pravic pri izvajanju njegovih obveznosti v zvezi z državljani EU in spremljanje izvajanja njegovih priporočil,
whereas Parliament's responsibility as the EU's sole elected body is to safeguard and protect the independence of the European Ombudsman in the conduct of his duties towards EU citizens and to monitor the implementation of his recommendations,
podpira kritične pripombe Evropskega varuha človekovih pravic in njegovo priporočilo Komisiji v povezavi s pritožbo 676/2008/RT;
Endorses the European Ombudsman's critical remarks and his recommendation to the Commission in relation to complaint 676/2008/RT;
priznava, da pretirane zamude pri odgovorih varuhu človekovih pravic v tej zadevi predstavljajo kršenje dolžnosti lojalnega sodelovanja Komisije, kot je predvideno v pogodbi;
Recognises that the excessive delays in responding to the Ombudsman in this case constitute a breach of the Commission's duty of sincere cooperation as envisaged in the Treaty;
je zelo zaskrbljen zaradi splošne prakse Komisije, da zavlačuje in ovira v povezavi s preiskavami varuha človekovih pravic v zadevah, ki vključujejo dostop do dokumentov;
Is very concerned at the general practice of delay and obstruction by the Commission in respect of the Ombudsman's inquiries in cases involving access to documents;
opozarja na ustrezno sodno prakso, ki zadeva načelo lojalnega sodelovanja (člen 4(3) PEU), v skladu s katerim so institucije Unije dolžne sodelovati v dobri veri pri svojih medsebojnih odnosih, ter ugotavlja, da je ta obveznost jasno določena v novem členu 13(2) PEU;
Recalls the relevant case-law concerning the principle of sincere cooperation (Article 4(3) TEU), according to which the Union institutions have a duty to cooperate in good faith in their relations with each other, and notes that this obligation is clearly stipulated in the new Article 13(2) TEU;