natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Selection Board could consult this provisional evaluation sheet when preparing the assessment of the candidates.
Izbirna komisij a je lahko to začasno ocenjevalno polo uporabila pri pripravi ocene kandidatov.
Given that this provisional evaluation sheet did not contain the assessment of the Selection Board but only formed part of its deliberations, it was not communicated to the candidates.
Na začasni ocenjevalni poli ni bilo ocene izbirne komisije. Predstavljala je le del končne odločitve komisije, zato te pole niso poslali kandidatom.
The assessment of the Selection Board only appeared on the evaluation sheet which was communicated to the complainant.
Ocena izbirne komisij e je bila podana le na ocenjevalni poli, ki so jo poslali pritožniku.
In addition to the indication of the mark given to the complainant, the Selection Board also wrote its comments on this evaluation sheet.
Izbirna komisij a je poleg ocene, ki jo je dala pritožniku, na to ocenjevalno polo zabeležila tudi svoje opombe.
The aim of such comments was to inform the complainant of the reasons why the Selection Board decided to give him a mark lower than the pass mark, so as to help the complainant, should he decide to participate in another competition in the future.
Z opombami je želela pritožniku pojasniti, zakaj se je odločila za nižjo oceno od ocene, zahtevane za vključitev v naslednjo stopnjo izbirnega postopka.
Press release no. 16/99 of the European Ombudsman of 15 December 1999.
Tako je želela pomagati kandidatu, če bi se v prihodnje odločil sodelovati v kakšnem drugem izbirnem postopku.
The European Ombudsman forwarded the Commission’s opinion to the complainant with an invitation to make observations.
Evropski varuh je mnenje Komisij e posredoval pritožniku in ga pozval, da poda svoje pripombe.
No observations were received from the complainant.
Pritožnik ni podal pripomb.
The Commission’s alleged failure to disclose to the complainant his marked examination paper
Komisij a pritožniku domnevno ni razkrila ocenjenega testa
1.1 The complainant alleged that the European Commission had failed to disclose his own marked examination paper in competition COM/C/1/01.
1.1 Pritožnik je trdil, da mu Evropska komisij a ni razkrila njegovega ocenjenega testa iz izbirnega postopka COM/C/1/01.
1.2 The European Commission argued that it had disclosed all the information relating to the wri en tests that was accessible to the candidates.
1.2 Evropska komisij a je trdila, da je razkrila vse podatke o pisnih testih, ki so bili dostopni kandidatom. Prav tako je poudarila, da na pisnih testih kandidatov ni bilo opomb.
It also pointed out that the examination scripts of the candidates who had sat the wri en tests did not contain any annotations.
Ocenjevalci so tovrstne opombe zapisali na začasno ocenjevalno polo v skladu z veljavnim postopkom.
Such annotations made by the examiners were wri en down in the provisional evaluation sheet in accordance with the current procedure.
Izbirna komisij a je lahko to začasno ocenjevalno polo uporabila pri pripravi ocene kandidatov.
The Selection Board could consult this provisional evaluation sheet when preparing the assessment of the candidates.
Na začasni ocenjevalni poli ni bilo ocene izbirne komisije. Predstavljala je le del njene odločitve, zato te pole niso poslali kandidatom.
Given that the provisional evaluation sheet did not contain the assessment of the Selection Board but only formed part of its deliberation, it was not communicated to the candidates.
1.3 Evropski varuh je po preiskavi na lastno pobudo o zaupnosti kot sestavnem delu izbirnega postopka Komisij e 18. oktobra 1999 poslal Evropskemu parlamentu posebno poročilo32.
1.3 On 18 October 1999, the European Ombudsman sent a Special Report to the European Parliament following the owninitiative inquiry into the secrecy which formed part of the Commission’s recruitment procedure32.
Posebno poročilo Evropskega varuha Evropskemu parlamentu po opravljeni preiskavi na lastno pobudo o zaupnosti kot sestavnem delu izbirnega postopka Komisije: h p://www.euro-ombudsman.eu.int/special/en/default.htm.
The Special Report included a formal recommendation
LETNO POROČILO 2003
DECISIONSFOLLOWING that in future recruitment competitions, the Commission should give candidates access to their own marked examination scripts on request.
Sklepi preiskav zaposlitev Komisij a morala kandidatom na zahtevo omogočiti dostop do ocenjenih pisnih testov.
On 7 December 1999, the President of the European Commission wrote to the European Ombudsman to inform him that:
Predsednik Evropske komisij e je 7. decembra 1999 poslal Evropskemu varuhu sporočilo, da:
“The Commission welcomes the recommendations you made in this report and will propose the necessary legal and organisational arrangements to give candidates access to their own marked examination papers, upon request, from 1 July 2000 onwards.” 33
“Komisija pozdravlja priporočila iz tega poročila in bo predlagala potrebne pravne in organizacijske predpise, ki bodo kandidatom na zahtevo omogočili dostop do ocenjenih pisnih testov od 1. julij a 2000 dalje.” 33
1.4 The European Ombudsman notes that the complainant asked the Commission to disclose his own marked examination paper.
1.4 Evropski varuh ugotavlja, da je pritožnik Komisij o zaprosil za svoj ocenjen test.
On 10 January 2003, the Commission sent to the complainant copies of his wri en paper and of the evaluation sheet.
Komisij a je 10. januarja 2003 pritožniku poslala kopij o njegovega pisnega testa skupaj z ocenjevalno polo.
The Selection Board wrote its comments relating to its assessment of the examination paper of the complainant on this evaluation sheet.
Izbirna komisij a je na to ocenjevalno polo zapisala opombe glede ocene pritožnikovega testa.
The European Ombudsman is not aware of any rule that would oblige the Selection Board to write its comments relating to the assessment of a candidate on the examination paper.
Evropski varuh ni seznanjen s predpisi, zaradi katerih bi izbirna komisij a morala zapisati opombe glede ocene kandidata na test.
The European Ombudsman therefore considers that the position adopted by the Commission appears to be reasonable.
Evropski varuh zato meni, da je stališče Komisij e sprejemljivo.
1.5 In these circumstances, the European Ombudsman considers that there appears to have been no maladministration on the part of the Commission.
Evropski varuh v teh okoliščinah ni ugotovil nepravilnosti pri ravnanju Komisije. e.
The allegation that the documents sent by the Commission, namely the evaluation sheet and the examination paper without any corrections, did not enable the complainant to know the errors he had made.
Trditev, da pritožnik iz dokumentov, ki mu jih je poslala Komisij a, namreč iz ocenjevalne pole in testa brez popravkov, ni mogel ugotoviti, kakšne napake je naredil.
2.1 The complainant alleged that the documents sent by the European Commission, namely the evaluation sheet and the examination paper without any corrections, did not enable him to know the errors he had made.
2.1 Pritožnik je trdil, da iz dokumentov, ki mu jih je poslala Komisij a, namreč iz ocenjevalne pole in testa brez popravkov, ni mogel ugotoviti, kakšne napake je naredil.
2.2 The European Commission stated that the assessment of the Selection Board appeared on the evaluation sheet which was communicated to the complainant. In addition to the indication of
2.2 Evropska komisij a je navedla, da je bila ocena izbirne komisij e na ocenjevalni poli, ki so jo poslali pritožniku.
See press release no. 16/99 of the European Ombudsman of 15 December 1999.
Izbirna komisij a je na ocenjevalno polo poleg ocene, ki jo je dala pritožniku, zapisala tudi opombe.
2.3 The European Ombudsman notes that, from the copy of the evaluation sheet which has been submi ed to him by the Commission, the evaluation sheet appears to contain specific remarks concerning the assessment by the Selection Board of the examination paper of the complainant relating to test d) of the competition.
2.3 Evropski varuh ugotavlja, da so na kopij i ocenjevalne pole, ki mu jo je predložila Komisij a, tudi posebne opombe o oceni, ki jo je izbirna komisij a dala pritožniku za njegov test d) iz izbirnega postopka.
In this evaluation sheet, the Selection Board also highlighted what it seems to have considered to be mistakes or weaknesses in the examination paper.
Izbirna komisij a je na tej ocenjevalni poli tudi pojasnila, kaj je štela za napake ali slabe strani testa.
The European Ombudsman therefore considers that the information provided to the complainant appears to be detailed enough to enable him to understand the errors he had made.
Evropski varuh zato meni, da so bile informacije, poslane pritožniku, dovolj podrobne, da je lahko iz njih ugotovil, kakšne napake je naredil.
2.4 From the above, the European Ombudsman concludes that there appears to have been no maladministration by the Commission in this aspect of the case.
2.4 Evropski varuh iz zgoraj navedenih dejstev ne ugotavlja nepravilnosti v ravnanju Komisij e glede tega vidika zadeve.
On the basis of the Ombudsman’s inquiries into this complaint, there appears to have been no maladministration by the European Commission. The Ombudsman therefore closes the case.
Evropski varuh na podlagi rezultatov preiskave te pritožbe ni ugotovil nepravilnosti pri ravnanju Evropske komisij e in s tem primer zaključuje.
ACCESS TO STATISTICS ABOUT STOCKS AND FLOWS OF EURO BANKNOTES
DOSTOP DO STATISTIK O REZERVAH IN KROŽENJU EVROBANKOVCEV
Decision on complaint 1939/2002/IJH against the European Central Bank
Sklep o pritožbi 1939/2002/IJH zoper Evropsko centralno banko
In November 2002, the complainant renewed his complaint to the Ombudsman against the refusal by the European Central Bank (ECB) to provide him with statistics about stocks and flows of Euro banknotes.
Pritožnik je novembra 2002 ponovno vložil pritožbo pri Evropskem varuhu, ker je Evropska centralna banka (ECB) zavrnila njegovo prošnjo za dostop do statistik o rezervah in kroženju evrobankovcev.
The complainant subsequently made a confirmatory application, which the Executive Board of the ECB rejected by le er dated 5 November 2002.
Njegova prejšnja pritožba iz julij a 2002 se je štela za nedopustno na podlagi člena
Decision of the European Central Bank of 3 November 1998 (ECB/1998/12), concerning public access to documentation and the archives of the European Central Bank 1999 OJ L110/30.
Glej Izjavo za javnost št. 16/99 Evropskega varuha z dne 15. decembra 1999.
Decisions following an inquiry
‒ zaščiti finančnih interesov ECB.
In his complaint to the Ombudsman, the complainant contests the ECB’s rejection of his confirmatory application.
Pritožnik v svoji pritožbi Evropskemu varuhu ugovarja odločitvi ECB, ki je zavrnila njegovo potrdilno prošnjo.
The complainant argues that none of the exceptions contained in Article 4 of Decision ECB/1998/12 applies to the statistics to which he claims access.
Pritožnik trdi, da se nobena izmed izjem iz člena 4 Sklepa ECB/1998/12 ne nanaša na statistike, do katerih bi rad imel dostop.
In summary, the ECB’s opinion made the following points:
Povzetek mnenja ECB:
The ECB has provided the complainant with the most recent information on aggregated volumes of Euro banknotes in circulation and in stock, broken down by denomination.
ECB je pritožniku poslala najnovejše podatke o skupnih količinah evrobankovcev v obtoku in rezervah evrobankovcev glede na apoene.
Furthermore, annual banknote production figures are published on the ECB’s website.
Poleg tega so letni podatki o tiskanju bankovcev objavljeni na spletni strani ECB.
Monthly data on the volume of Euro banknotes returned to the national central banks of the Eurosystem are also available on request.
Mesečni podatki o količini evrobankovcev, ki se vrnejo v nacionalne centralne banke evrosistema, so dostopni na zahtevo.
In partially rejecting the complainant’s request for information, the ECB acted on the basis of and in accordance with Article 4 of Decision ECB/1998/12 in that the disclosure of the information could have undermined the interests set out in that Article.
Z delno zavrnitvijo pritožnikove prošnje za podatke je ECB ravnala na podlagi in v skladu s členom 4 Sklepa ECB/1998/12, po katerem bi razkritje podatkov lahko škodilo interesom iz tega člena.
If information on the stocks and flows of banknotes in the territories of different Euro area Member States were to be made available to the public, it could jeopardise the security of both the storage of banknotes and their subsequent transfer between national central banks: these transfers are made to compensate for any (potential) shortages.
Če bi podatke o rezervi in kroženju bankovcev na ozemlju različnih držav članic evroobmočja dali na razpolago javnosti, bi to lahko ogrozilo varnost shranjevanja bankovcev in nadaljnjega transferja med nacionalnimi centralnimi bankami. S temi transferji se nadomesti (morebitno) pomanjkanje bankovcev.
Furthermore, such information could undermine the security of the persons responsible for the stocks and/or involved in the transportation of banknotes.
Poleg tega bi taki podatki lahko škodili varnosti oseb, odgovornih za rezerve in/ali tistih, ki prevažajo bankovce.
This reasoning would hold true even if information were to be made public a er the actual transportation had taken place, since certain trends can still be identified.
Taka obrazložitev bi držala tudi, če bi bili podatki na voljo javnosti šele po dejanskem prevozu bankovcev, saj bi se še vedno lahko ugotovilo določene trende.
This point is particularly relevant for smaller Member States, which might have a limited number of banknote storage locations.
To zlasti drži za manjše države članice, ki bi lahko imele omejeno število lokacij za shranjevanje bankovcev.
Banknote stocks and transports are security sensitive issues because of the possible large values that can be involved.
Rezerve in prevoz bankovcev sta varnostno občutljivi temi zaradi potencialno velikih vrednosti.
The Executive Board of the ECB carefully weighed the interests of the general public in having access to this kind of information against the public interest in being protected in such cases, and in particular the issue of public security.
Izvršilni svet ECB je skrbno pretehtal interese javnosti glede dostopa do tovrstnih podatkov in zaščito javnega interesa v takih primerih, zlasti vprašanje javne varnosti.
On the basis of this consideration, the Executive Board concluded that information relating to the stocks and transportation of banknotes must not be disclosed.
Izvršilni svet se je na podlagi tega odločil, da se podatki o rezervah in prevozu bankovcev ne smejo razkriti.
This decision also applies to information on past transports, since this kind of information may a ract significant criminal a ention.
Ta odločitev velja tudi za podatke o preteklih prevozih, saj bi lahko tovrstni podatki vzbudili pozornost morebitnih storilcev kaznivih dejanj.
In light of the above security concerns, the national central banks of the Eurosystem, which in practice manage the stocks and flows of Euro banknotes, and other parties responsible for and/or involved with stocks and transportation (e.g. police and military forces in a number of Euro area Member States) have asked the ECB to keep such information confidential. dential.
Z vidika zgoraj omenjenih varnostnih razlogov so nacionalne centralne banke evrosistema, ki dejansko upravljajo z rezervami in kroženjem evrobankovcev, in drugi odgovorni in/ali zaposleni, ki ravnajo z rezervami in sodelujejo pri prevozu (npr. policija in vojska v številnih državah članicah evroobmočja), zahtevali od ECB, da te podatke obdrži v tajnosti.
The ECB a aches particular importance to giving citizens the greatest possible access to information in order to strengthen the democratic nature of public authorities and to bolster public confidence in the administration.
ECB pripisuje poseben pomen kar najširšemu dostopu javnosti do podatkov, da bi tako okrepila demokratično naravo organov oblasti in zaupanje javnosti v upravo.
Nevertheless, an important reason for denying access to information on stocks and flows of banknotes in different Member States is the risk that third parties could misinterpret the information and thus make a false assessment of the availability of certain banknote denominations.
Pomemben razlog za zavrnitev dostopa do podatkov o rezervah in kroženju evrobankovcev v različnih državah članicah je nevarnost, da bi tretje osebe lahko napačno razumele podatke in zato napačno ocenile
This could prompt the general public and retailers to hoard certain banknote denominations, thus leading to a shortage of such denominations (creating, in effect, a “self-fulfilling prophecy”).
Sklep Evropske centralne banke z dne 3. novembra 1998 (ECB/1998/12) o dostopu javnosti do dokumentacije in arhivov Evropske centralne banke, UL L 110/30, 1999.
Decisions following an inquiry used for cross-border transactions.
Sklepi preiskav razpoložljivost določenih apoenov bankovcev.
The European System of Central Banks (ESCB) has established mechanisms to compensate for regional shortages by building up surplus stocks.
Evropski sistem centralnih bank (ESCB) je vzpostavil mehanizme za obnavljanje regionalnega primanjkljaja z nalaganjem dodatnih rezerv.
In this context, the Executive Board of the ECB has carefully weighed the interests of the general public in having access to this kind of information against the public interest to be protected.
V tem smislu je izvršilni odbor ECB skrbno pretehtal interese javnosti glede dostopa do tovrstnih podatkov in zaščito javnega interesa.
It concluded that the above-mentioned risks, based on past experience, are significant enough to justify not publishing the requested information.
Njegov sklep je bil, da so glede na pretekle izkušnje zgoraj našteta tveganja dovolj pomembna, da upravičujejo zavrnitev objave zahtevanih podatkov.
The complainant’s observations on the ECB’s opinion made, in summary, the following points:
Povzetek pripomb pritožnika glede mnenja ECB:
For the avoidance of doubt, the information that the complainant seeks is data on country-specific stocks, that is, the value of Euro banknotes in circulation from time to time within the territory of each of the participating Member States, expressed either in absolute terms or in relative terms, as proportions of the aggregate value of Euro banknotes in circulation in the Euro area.
Pritožnik je pojasnil, da želi dobiti podatke o rezervah določene države, t.j. vrednosti evrobankovcev v obtoku v določenem obdobju na ozemlju vsake države članice evroobmočja.
The complainant is not seeking information about the transfer of Euro banknotes from the territory of one participating Member State to another, nor about the ECB’s decisions or criteria concerning such transfers.
Vrednost je lahko izražena absolutno ali relativno, kot delež skupne vrednosti evrobankovcev v obtoku na evroobmočju.
In rejecting the complainant’s confirmatory application, the ECB cited the first and fourth indents of Article 4 of Decision ECB/1998/12.
Pri zavrnitvi pritožnikove potrdilne prošnje je ECB citirala prvo in četrto alineo člena 4 Sklepa ECB/1998/12.
The fourth indent concerns the protection of the ECB’s financial interests. However, it appears from the ECB’s opinion that it intended to cite not the fourth, but the fi h, indent.
Četrta alinea zadeva zaščito finančnih interesov ECB, vendar je iz mnenja ECB razvidno, da je nameravala navesti peto in ne četrto alineo.
This concerns the “protection of confidentiality as requested by any natural or legal person who supplied any of the information contained in the document or as required by the law applicable to such person.”
Ta se nanaša na “varovanje zaupnosti, če to zahteva f i fizična ali pravna oseba, ki je posredovala kakršne koli podatke iz dokumenta, ali če to zahteva za to osebo veljavna zakonodaja”.
The ECB’s opinion mentions that other parties responsible for and or involved with stocks and transportation (e.g. police and military forces in a number of Euro area Member States) have asked the ECB to keep such information confidential.
V mnenju ECB je omenjeno, da so druge strani, odgovorne za rezerve ali ki ravnajo z njimi in sodelujejo pri prevozu bankovcev (npr. policija in vojska v številnih državah članicah evroobmočja), zahtevale od ECB, da tovrstne podatke obdrži v tajnosti.
However, parties such as police and military forces, are not “persons who supplied any of the information.” Therefore, the fi h indent cannot apply to them.
Vendar policija in vojska nista “osebi, ki sta posredovali kakršen koli podatek”, zato se za njiju ne more uporabiti peta alinea.
Furthermore, confidentiality does not arise simply by virtue of a person requesting it.
Poleg tega zaupnost ne nastane preprosto zato, ker bi to nekdo zahteval.
There has to be actual confidentiality within the meaning of Article 8 of Regulation 2533/98.35 For such purposes, the national central banks (NCBs) are not “reporting agents” but collectors of information pursuant to their obligations under Articles 5.1 and 5.2 of the Statute of the ESCB and ECB.
Dejanska zaupnost je določena v smislu člena 8 Uredbe 2533/9835. V ta namen nacionalne centralne banke (NCB) ne veljajo za “poročevalske enote”, temveč za zbiralce podatkov v skladu z njihovimi obveznostmi na podlagi členov 5(1) in 5(2) Statuta ESCB in ECB.
Therefore, although the information would, by its nature, allow the NCBs to be identified, it would not be confidential. dential.
V tem smislu podatki ne bi bili zaupni kljub temu, da bi zaradi svoje narave omogočili prepoznavo NCB.
As regards the issue of security, the complainant points out that variations in country-specific stocks of Euro banknotes would not normally lead to transfers of banknotes between national central banks and that Article 3 (4) of Decision ECB/2001/15 makes clear that such transfers are the exception and not the rule.36 Therefore, it cannot be concluded, from data on country-specific stocks or variations in them, either that such transfers have occurred or that exceptional circumstances, giving rise to future transfers, have arisen.
Kar zadeva varnost, pritožnik opozarja, da razlike med rezervami evrobankovcev posameznih držav običajno ne bi povzročile transferja bankovcev med nacionalnimi centralnimi bankami in da je iz člena 3(4) Sklepa ECB/2001/15 jasno razvidno, da so taki transferji izjema in ne pravilo36.
Even if such conclusions could be drawn, no trends could be identified because exceptional circumstances are, by definition, not subject to trends.
Iz podatkov o rezervah posameznih držav ali razlikah med njimi torej ni mogoče sklepati, ali so bili taki transferji izvršeni oziroma ali je prišlo do posebnih okoliščin, zaradi katerih bodo transferji izvršeni.
If it was accepted, there would be no limit to its application and it would substantially undermine the Declaration on the Right of Access to Information annexed to the Final Act of the Treaty on European Union.
Tudi če bi lahko prišli do takih zaključkov, ne bi mogli razpoznati trendov, saj se izjemne
Council Regulation (EC) No 2533/98 of 23 November 1998 concerning the collection of statistical information by the European Central Bank, 1998 OJ L 318/8.
Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 2533/98 z dne 23. novembra 1998 o zbiranju statističnih informacij s strani Evropske centralne banke, UL L 318/8, 1998.
Decision of the European Central Bank of 6 December 2001 on the issue of euro banknotes (ECB/2001/15) 2001 OJ L 337/52: “NCBs shall not transfer euro banknotes accepted by them to other NCBs and shall keep such euro banknotes available for reissue.
Sklep Evropske centralne banke z dne 6. decembra 2001 o izdajanju evrobankovcev (ECB/2001/15), UL L 337/52, 2001: “NCB ne izvajajo transferja svojih evro bankovcev na druge NCB in jih hranijo za ponovno izdajanje.
As an exception, and in accordance with any rules laid down by the Governing Council of the ECB: (...) (b) euro banknotes held by NCBs may, for logistical reasons, be redistributed in bulk within the Eurosystem.”
V izjemnih primerih in v skladu s predpisi, ki jih določi Svet ECB: (...) (b) evrobankovci, ki jih hranijo NCB, se lahko zaradi logističnih razlogov v velikih količinah prerazporejajo znotraj evrosistema.”