natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
He also suggested that it reconsider whether adequate publicity had been given to the relevant public consultation.
Zato je primer zaključil s kritično pripombo.
The Commission refused to follow the Ombudsman's recommendation and the Ombudsman closed the case with two critical remarks.In case 2152/2006/OV, a Dutch pensioner residing in France complained to the Commission that the Netherlands was infringing Community rules on social security benefits.
Varuh človekovih pravic obravnava pritožbe zaradi dodelitve ali zavrnjene dodelitve razpisov in dotacij. Vendar meni, da imajo institucije in zlasti odbori za oceno ponudb in organi, ki dodeljujejo
As has already been mentioned in this section, the Commission failed to register the complaint and to reply to essential points in it.
Varuh človekovih pravic obravnava pritožbezaradi dodelitve ali zavrnjene dodelitve razpisovin dotacij.
It did so after the Ombudsman intervened.
razpise, široka pooblastila glede na dejavnike, ki jih upoštevajo pri odločanju, ali bodo dodelili pogodbo po javnem razpisu.
However, it maintained its view on the substance of the case.
Meni, da je njegov pregled v takšnih primerih omejen na preverjanje, ali so bila upoštevana pravila, ki urejajo postopke, ali dejstva držijo in ali ni bila storjena napaka pri vrednotenju ali zloraba pooblastil.
In closing the case, the Ombudsman stated that he trusted that, in examining the case, the Commission would duly take into consideration the latest arguments put forward by the complainant and pointed out that the latter could lodge a new complaint if he were not satisfied with the Commission's final decision on the case.In case 3249/2006/(PB)WP, a German citizen complained to the Ombudsman after the Commission refused to take action against Germany for having violated his freedom of movement.
Poleg tega lahko preuči, ali so institucije upoštevale svojo dolžnost, da navedejo razloge, in ali so ti razlogi skladni in smiselni. V več primerih, v katerih so pritožniki trdili, da so bila kršena razpisna pravila, in so izpodbijali odločbe organov, ki dodeljujejo razpise, varuh človekovih pravic pri svojih preiskavah ni ugotovil nepravilnosti24.
This followed a dispute over a tax bill. The Ombudsman recalled that the main purpose of infringement procedures is to ensure future compliance of Member States with Community law and that these procedures are not designed to provide redress for complainants regarding events in the past.
V enem primeru je dal dodatno pripombo, z namenom, da izboljša kakovost prihodnjih postopkov25, v enem pa kritično pripombo, ker zadevna institucija ni navedla mehanizmov za pritožbe zoper sprejeto odločbo26.V primeru 546/2007/JMA je bila obravnavana izključitev podjetja iz več javnih razpisov za izvedbo določenega projekta.
He considered that further inquiries were not justified.
Varuh človekovih pravic je menil, da so bili razlogi, ki jih je izpostavila institucija, smiselni, in ni ugotovil nobenih nepravilnosti.V primeru 3113/2007/ELB je bil ponudnik na razpisu izključen, ker naj ne bi imel ustreznih gospodarskih in finančnih zmogljivosti za izvedbo pogodbe.
Case 1962/2005/IP concerned a road by-pass project consisting of three individual sections.
Varuh človekovih pravic je opozoril, da uprava, ki organizira javni razpis, ni pristojna za presojo, ali vlagatelji izpolnjujejo ustrezne pogoje, in da ne sme zamenjevati lastnega mnenja z mnenjem uprave.
The complainant argued that the environmental rules contained in Community law had not been followed before the construction process was launched.
Menil je, da je institucija v tem primeru ponudila razumno razlago svojega stališča.V primeru 3346/2005/MHZ v zvezi z razpisom za dobavo IT-sistema je pritožnik trdil, da Komisija ni navedla zadostnih razlogov za zavrnitev njegove ponudbe, da je napačno uporabila merila za dodelitev in da je razpis preklicala zaradi neveljavnih razlogov.
The Commission closed the infringement procedure stating that there had been no violation of Community law.
Varuh človekovih pravic se je strinjal, da gre za nepravilno obravnavo razpisnega postopka.
The Ombudsman did not find the Commission's explanation as to why it had decided to close the case to be sufficient and coherent.
Komisijo je kritiziral, ker je zavrnila njegov predlog za sporazumno rešitev, in poudaril, da je možnost, da bo dosegel izid, ki je sprejemljiv za obe strani, odvisen od pripravljenosti institucije, da sprejme državljanu prijazen pristop.
However, he considers that the institutions and, in particular, the evaluation committees and the
Komisija se je opravičila za to, da je razloge za svoje odločitve navedla šele skoraj tri leta po prejemu teh odločitev, in izrazila obžalovanje za pretiravanje pri obtoževanju goljufije.
The Ombudsman deals with complaints about the award, or non-award, of tenders and grants.
Navedla je še, da je znatno izboljšala svoj sistem preverjanja primernosti, in se tudi opravičila za nekatera svoja dejanja.
awarding authorities in tenders, have a broad discretion with regard to the factors they take into account when deciding whether to award a contract following an invitation to tender.
Kljub temu se ji ni uspelo ustrezno lotiti se najresnejših primerov nepravilnosti, ki jih je prepoznal varuh človekovih pravic.
He considers that his review of such cases should be limited to checking whether the rules governing the procedure are complied with, the facts are correct, and that there is no manifest error of assessment or misuse of powers.
Ta je vztrajal pri kritiki Komisije, pri čemer je poudaril, da njen odziv verjetno ne bo izboljšal zaupanja med državljani in interesnimi skupinami.
Complaints and inquiries
■■Izvajanje pogodb
In several cases where complainants alleged a breach of tender rules and challenged the decisions taken by the awarding authorities, the Ombudsman concluded his inquiries with findings of no maladministration24.
Varuh človekovih pravic meni, da se nepravilnosti pojavijo, kadar javni organ ne ukrepa v skladu s pravilom ali načelom, ki ga zavezuje.
The complainant had previously conducted a feasibility study for this particular project and the institution considered that there was a possible conflict of interest.
Nepravilnosti je tako mogoče odkriti tudi v zvezi z izpolnje-
The Ombudsman considered that the reasons put forward by the institution were reasonable and found no maladministration.In case 3113/2007/ELB, a tenderer was excluded because it was considered not to have the appropriate economic and financial capacity to execute the contract.
Varuh človekovih pravic meni, da se nepravilnostipojavijo, kadar javni organ ne ukrepa vskladu s pravilom ali načelom, ki ga zavezuje.Nepravilnosti je tako mogoče odkriti tudi v zveziz izpolnjevanjem obveznosti iz pogodb, ki so jihsklenile institucije ali organi Skupnosti.
The Ombudsman recalled that it was for the administration organising the call for tenders to assess whether applicants fulfil the relevant conditions and that he must not substitute his own assessment for that of the administration.
vanjem obveznosti iz pogodb, ki so jih sklenile institucije ali organi Skupnosti.Obseg pregleda, ki ga lahko opravi varuh človekovih pravic v takšnih primerih, pa je nujno omejen.
The Ombudsman confirmed an improper handling of the tender procedure.
Varuh človekovih pravic meni, da kadar je zadeva sporna, ne bi smel preverjati, ali je katera koli od strani prekršila pogodbo.
He criticised the Commission for refusing his friendly solution proposal, underlining that the possibility for him to achieve an outcome acceptable to both parties depends on the institution's willingness to adopt a citizen-friendly approach.
To vprašanje lahko učinkovito obravnava samo pristojno sodišče, ki ima možnost poslušati argumente vseh strani v zvezi z ustrezno nacionalno zakonodajo in ovrednotiti nasprotujoče si dokaze o spornih vprašanjih.Varuh človekovih pravic meni, da je v primerih, ki zadevajo pogodbene spore, upravičeno, da svojo preiskavo omeji na preučitev, ali je institucija Skupnosti zagotovila oziroma ali je organ Skupnosti zagotovil skladno in smiselno pravno podlago za svoja dejanja ter zakaj meni, da je njeno oziroma njegovo stališče do pogodbenega položaja upravičeno.
Case 2283/2004/GG concerned a German NGO, supporting refugees and victims of war.
Če je to stališče upravičeno, bo varuh človekovih pravic prispel do zaključka, da njegova preiskava ni ugotovila nepravilnosti.
It had applied to the Commission to co-finance several projects.
Ta odločba ne bo vplivala na pravico strani, da njihov pogodbeni spor preuči in avtoritativno reši pristojno sodišče.
The Ombudsman found, among other things, that the Commission failed to handle the complainant's applications fairly and objectively and that it made unfounded accusations of fraud against the complainant.
Če se strani odločijo za to možnost, bo varuh človekovih pravic takoj zaključil preiskavo brez nadaljnjega presojanja ob upoštevanju določbe v členu 2(7) svojega statuta27.Na podlagi prej omenjenega pregleda je varuh človekovih pravic zaključil več preiskav z ugotovitvijo, da nepravilnosti ni bilo, ali je menil, da nadaljnje preiskave niso upravičene.
The Commission apologised for the fact that it only specified the reasons for its decisions nearly three years after the decisions had been adopted and expressed its regrets for its overreaction as regards the accusation of fraud. It also stated that it had considerably improved its system of eligibility checks and also apologised for some of its actions.
Zadevni primeri so vključevali spore glede delovnih dni, ki so bili priznani in uporabljeni kot podlaga za plačilo28, spore glede upravičenih stroškov in/ali zneskov, ki jih je treba izterjati ali izplačati po revizijah29, zavrnitve izplačila obresti za zamudo pri plačilih30 ali velike zamude pri plačilih predfinanciranja za določeno dotacijo31.V zvezi z zamudami pri plačilu so bile številne preiskave zaključene kot primeri, ki so jih rešile institucije, saj je zadevna institucija (Komisija) pritožnikom lahko izplačala njihove zahtevke in zahtevkom ugodila po tem, ko je varuh človekovih pravic sprožil svoje preiskave32.
It failed, however, properly to address the most serious instances of maladministration identified by the Ombudsman. He went on to criticise the Commission, by emphasising that its reaction was not likely to inspire confidence among citizens and concerned stakeholders alike.
Opozoriti je treba, da je v letu 2008 varuh človekovih pravic zaključil preiskavo na svojo pobudo (OI/5/2007/GG) v zvezi z zamudami pri izplačilih Komisije, pri kateri je ugotovil, da je na tem področju še potreben napredek.Druga vrsta težav, ki jo obravnava varuh človekovih pravic v pogodbenih primerih, se nanaša na posebne pogodbe, ki jih Komisija sklene za izvajanje ukrepov ali programov, ki jih financira EU.
The Ombudsman considers that maladministration occurs when a public body fails to act in accordance with a rule or principle which is binding upon it. Maladministration may thus also be
V letu 2008 so se institucije, še posebej Komisija,zelo potrudile, da bi sprejele sporazumnerešitve, ki jih je predlagal varuh človekovih pravicv primerih v zvezi s pogodbenimi spori.
The Ombudsman considers that maladministration occurs when a public body fails to act in accordance with a rule or principle which is binding upon it.
Komisija sklene pogodbeno razmerje z določenim podjetjem ali konzorcijem, ki nato izvaja zadevni projekt, tako da uporabi podizvajalce, strokovnjake ali svoje zaposlene.
Maladministration may thus also be found when the fulfilment of obligations arising from contracts concluded by Community institutions or bodies is concerned.
Nekatere od teh pogodb in ustrezni okvirni programi Komisiji dajejo nekatere pravice v zvezi s strokovnjaki ali zaposlenimi pogodbenikov.
found when the fulfilment of obligations arising from contracts concluded by Community institutions or bodies is concerned.However, the scope of the review that the Ombudsman can carry out in such cases is necessarily limited.
Te posebne pogodbene okoliščine so lahko povod za spore med pogodbeniki Komisije in njihovim osebjem ali strokovnjaki in varuh človekovih pravic meni, da Komisija v zvezi s tem nosi določeno stopnjo odgovornosti33.
The Ombudsman is of the view that he should not seek to determine whether there has been a breach of contract by either party, if the matter is in dispute.
Primer 193/2007/JMA je obravnaval odslovitev vodje projekta, potem ko je Komisija izrazila nezadovoljstvo z delom, ki ga je opravil.
This question can only be dealt with effectively by a court of competent jurisdiction, which would have the possibility to hear the arguments of the parties concerning the relevant national law and to evaluate conflicting evidence on any disputed issues of fact.
Čeprav varuh človekovih pravic ni odkril nepravilnosti, je opozoril, da bi morala institucija svoje stališče izraziti pisno, tako da zadevna oseba lahko predstavi svoje mnenje svojemu delo-
24.Cases 118/2006/PB, 1667/2007/(BM)JMA, 494/2006/TN, 3006/2004/BB and 3114/2004/IP.25.Case 3148/2007/BEH.26.Case 2989/2006/OV.
27.Primer 2392/2005/OV.28.Primer 1331/2007/JMA.29.Primeri 3394/2005/(TN)DK, 3736/2006/JF, 1367/2007/ELB, 2689/2005/BB in 1785/2005/OV.30.Primer 1644/2007/FOR.31.Primera 3794/2006/FOR in 1564/2006/VIK.32.Primeri 338/2008/BEH, 1945/2007/WP, 2272/2008/JMA in 2273/2007/MF.33.Druge primere tega vprašanja, poleg teh, naštetih tukaj, je mogoče najti v primerih 579/2007/(TN)TS, 2306/2007/(OV)BEH, 3375/2006/JF in 3090/2005/(GK)MHZ.
The European Ombudsman — Annual Report 2008
Evropski varuh človekovih pravic — Letno poročilo 2008 dajalcu, ki je bil pogodbenik Komisije.
In cases concerning contractual disputes, the Ombudsman considers it justified to limit his inquiry to examining whether the Community institution or body has provided him with a coherent and reasonable account of the legal basis for its actions and why it believes that its view of the contractual position is justified.
Varuh človekovih pravic je dal isto pripombo v primeru 1084/2006/MHZ v zvezi z odnosi med pogodbenikom in njegovim podizvajalcem.V letu 2008 so se institucije, še posebej Komisija, zelo potrudile, da bi sprejele sporazumne rešitve, ki jih je predlagal varuh človekovih pravic v primerih v zvezi s pogodbenimi spori. →→→ V primeru 3490/2005/(ID)PB, ki je med letošnjimi nadvse uspešnimi primeri, je varuhu človekovih pravic odziv Komisije ocenil kot vzoren.
If that is the case, the Ombudsman will conclude that his inquiry has not revealed an instance of maladministration.
Komisija je bila med celotnim potekom postopka temeljita in konstruktivna, celo tako zelo, da je sprejela dodatna ustrezna plačila, ki so jih odkrile njene službe in pritožnik.
This conclusion will not affect the right of the parties to have their contractual dispute examined and authoritatively settled by a court of competent jurisdiction.
Primer 3784/2006/FOR, še eden od nadvse uspešnih primerov v letu 2008, je obravnaval avstrijski inštitut, ki je trdil, da Komisija ni plačala neporavnanega zneska v višini 97 000 eUR za naročilo na področju raziskav in razvoja na področju kemijskega inženiringa.
If the parties do so, the Ombudsman will close his inquiry immediately with no further assessment, in light of the provision in Article 2(7) of his Statute27.On the basis of the aforementioned examination, the Ombudsman has closed several inquiries with findings of no maladministration or has considered that no further inquiries were justified.
Komisija je zavrnitev izplačila utemeljila s tem, da ni pravočasno prejela končnega poročila o stroških. Varuh človekovih pravic je menil, da je njen odziv nesorazmeren, in jo je zaprosil, naj razmisli o spremembi svojega stališča. Komisija se je strinjala, da bo plačala znesek v višini 54 000 eUR.
It should be noted that, in 2008, the Ombudsman closed an own-initiative inquiry (OI/5/2007/GG) into late payment by the Commission, which concluded that progress in this area still has to be made.A further type of problem dealt with by the Ombudsman in contractual cases relates to the particular contracts the Commission establishes for executing EU-funded actions or programmes.
Ker razloga za prekinitev pogodbe ni bilo mogoče pripisati pritožniku, se je Komisija strinjala, da je podjetje upravičeno do odškodnine. Pritožnik je pozneje varuha človekovih pravic obvestil, da je bil organiziran nov javni razpis in da je bilo podjetje uvrščeno v ožji izbor ponudnikov.
In 2008, the institutions, and particularly the Commission, made a real effort to accept friendly solutions proposed by the Ombudsman in contractual disputes.
Varuh človekovih pravic prejme vsako leto določeno število pritožb, povezanih z upravnimi dejavnostmi institucij (31 preiskav oziroma 10 % vseh preiskav, začetih v letu 2008). Te dejavnosti so pove-
Commission establishes a contractual relation with a certain firm or consortium which then implements the project in question by using sub-contractors, experts or its own employees.
Varuh človekovih pravic prejme vsako letodoločeno število pritožb, povezanih z upravnimidejavnostmi institucij.
Some of these contracts and the respective framework programmes give the Commission some rights in relation to the contractor's experts or employees.
zane z uporabo kadrovskih predpisov za uradnike in drugih ustreznih besedil. Narava teh primerov se znatno razlikuje in zadevajo skoraj vse institucije in organe.
This particular contractual environment can give rise to disputes between the Commission's contractors and their staff or experts, with respect to which the Ombudsman considers that the Commission has a certain degree of responsibility33.
V letu 2008 je varuh človekovih pravic zaključil štiri primere, povezane z uradniki ali njihovimi sorodniki, ki so se pri njem pritožili glede po njihovem mnenju nepoštenih nalogov za izterjavo denarja, ki so ga institucije neupravičeno izplačale.
Case 193/2007/JMA concerned the dismissal of a project leader after the Commission expressed its dissatisfaction with the work he had provided.
To, da se neupravičena plačila izplačujejo uradnikom ali tretjim osebam, ki slabše poznajo pravila in predpise Skupnosti, je pri tem vsekakor pomembno.
Although the Ombudsman found no maladministration, he drew attention to the fact that the position expressed by the institution should be made in writing so as to allow the person in question to present his views to his employer who was the Commission's contractor.
Varuh človekovih pravic spoštuje in poudarja, da so se zadevne institucije večinoma potrudile in se pozitivno odzvale na njegove predloge o sporazumni rešitvi in osnutke priporočil.
The Ombudsman made the same remark in case 1084/2006/MHZ, concerning relations between the contractor and its sub-con-tractor.The Ombudsman would like to underline that, in 2008, the institutions, and particularly the Commission, made a real effort to accept friendly solutions proposed by the Ombudsman in contractual disputes. →→→ In case 3490/2005/(ID)PB, which features among this year's star cases, the Ombudsman found the Commission's response to be exemplary.
V primeru 902/2007/(MHZ)RT je Parlament sprejel osnutek priporočila, da naj delno zniža znesek na nalogu za izterjavo. V primeru 3464/2004/(TN)TS varuh človekovih pravic ni ugotovil nobene nepravilnosti v zvezi z nalogom za izterjavo, ki ga je Parlament izdal upokojenemu uradniku, vendar je obsojal institucijo zaradi načina, kako je to izpeljala, namreč, ne da bi pri tem pritožnika obvestila o svoji odločbi ali utemeljitvi.
It had been thorough and constructive throughout the procedure, even to the point of accepting additional relevant payments identified by its own services and the complainant.
Po tem, ko se je varuh človekovih pravic odločil, da bo opravil nadaljnje preiskave v primeru 3778/2005/ELB, ki je obravnaval osemletno zamudo pri izdaji naloga za izterjavo, je Komisija nalog preklicala, saj je prav tako spoznala, da bodo stroški za izterjavo denarja verjetno presegli dolg.
The settlement implied that the balance of the project account was closed with payments of eUR 48 486.79 and USD 101 938.40 to the complainant.
V primeru 2879/2008/BU, je Komisija, po tem ko je varuh človekovih pravic začel poenostavljeni postopek, pristala, da prekliče nalog za izterjavo dolgovanih obresti v znesku manj kot 200 eUR.
Case 3784/2006/FOR, another star case for the year 2008, concerned an Austrian institute which claimed that the Commission had not paid an outstanding sum of eUR 97 000 for a research and development contract in the
Varuh človekovih pravic je v letu 2008 zaključil devet primerov, povezanih z zunanjepolitičnim delovanjem Komisije (Relex). Trije od teh primerov so bili povezani z raznimi težavami v zvezi
Complaints and inquiries field of chemical engineering.
Pritožbe in preiskave s programom „strokovnih sodelavcev“ za delegacije Komisije.
To justify its refusal to pay, the Commission explained that it had not received the final cost statements on time.
Med težavami so bile težave v zvezi z izbiro35, zaposlovanjem in delovnimi pogoji36 ter prilagoditve nadomestil37.
The Ombudsman judged its reaction to be disproportionate and asked it to reconsider its position. The Commission agreed to pay eUR 54 000.
Varuh človekovih pravic je zaključil tudi več primerov, povezanih z odločbami o ocenah za lokalne agente38, odpuščanjem svetovalcev, ki delajo pri projektih, ki jih financira EU39, zavrnitvijo sklenitve posebnih dogovorov glede sodelovanja lokalnih agentov v natečajih, ki jih prireja Epso40, in s postopki za zaposlovanje za IT-upravitelje v delegacijah Komisije41.
The institute accepted the proposal and thanked the Ombudsman for his intervention. ←←←The Commission also settled case 2273/2007/MF by agreeing to pay compensation to the complainant whose contract it had terminated after it identified an irregularity in the tender award procedure.
Izsledki teh preiskav se močno razlikujejo, vendar razmeroma veliko prejetih pritožb kaže, da je na področju upravljanja kadrov na tem zelo decentraliziranem področju delovanja Komisije veliko možnosti za izboljšave.
The complainant subsequently informed the Ombudsman that a new call for tender had been launched and that the firm was among the list of short-listed tenderers.
Varuh človekovih pravic z veseljem ugotavlja, da je imelo znatno število pritožb na področju pritožb osebja pozitiven izid zaradi dejavnega pristopa uprave.
These activities
V primeru 1918/2007/ELB v zvezi
Every year the Ombudsman receives a certain number of complaints concerning the administrative activities of the institutions.
Varuh človekovih pravic z veseljem ugotavlja, daje imelo znatno število pritožb na področju pritožb osebja pozitiven izid zaradi dejavnegapristopa uprave.
relate to the application of the Staff Regulations for officials and other relevant texts.
s pritožbo zaradi zamud pri izvajanju vrste sodnih odločb, povezanih s kariero pritožnika, je Komisija zadevo rešila v zadovoljstvo pritožnika.
The nature of these cases varies considerably and they concern almost all institutions and bodies.In 2008, the Ombudsman closed four cases concerning either officials or their relatives who complained to him about what they considered to be unfair recovery orders of monies unduly paid by the institutions.
Sporazumna rešitev, ki jo je predlagal varuh človekovih pravic, je bila sprejeta v primeru 693/2006/(BM)FOR, ki je obravnaval spor zaradi zneska nadomestila za nastanitev, ki bi se moral izplačati agentu, zaposlenem na področju dobrodelne pomoči tretjim državam s hrano in sodelovanjem.
The Ombudsman's approach in such matters is based on the case-law of the Community courts34 and on considerations of fairness and reasonableness regarding these recovery orders.
Varuh človekovih pravic je lahko primer 2331/2007/RT, ki je vključeval plačilo stroškov za pogreb, zaključil kot primer, ki ga je rešila institucija.