natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
As the pleas of lack of competence and infringement of the Treaty are well-founded and entail the annulment of the contested provisions, there is no need to rule on the other two pleas submitted by the Parliament alleging an insufficient statement of reasons and a breach of the principle of cooperation in good faith.
Ker sta tožbena razloga nepristojnosti in kr�itve Pogodbe utemeljena in se zato izpodbijane določbe razglasijo za nične, se ni treba izreči o drugih dveh tožbenih razlogih glede nezadostne obrazložitve in kr�itve načela lojalnega sodelovanja, ki ju navaja Parlament.
On the grounds set out above, I propose that the Court should:
Na podlagi navedenih razlogov Sodi�ču predlagam:
‘Annul Article 29(1) and (2) and Article 36(3) of Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005 on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status.’
Člena 29(1) in (2) ter 36(3) Direktive Sveta 2005/85/ES z dne 1. decembra 2005 o minimalnih standardih glede postopkov za priznanje ali odvzem statusa begunca v državah članicah naj razglasi za nična.
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber)
SODBA SODIŠČA (veliki senat) z dne 6. maja 2008 *
APPLICATION for annulment under the first paragraph of Article 230 EC, brought on 8 March 2006,
V zadevi C-133/06, zaradi ničnostne tožbe na podlagi člena 230, prvi odstavek, ES, vložene 8. marca 2006,
JUDGMENT OF 6. 5.
SODBA Z DNE 6. 5. 2008 – ZADEVA C-133/06 proti
French Republic, represented by G. de Bergues and J.-C. Niollet, acting as Agents, intervener,
Francoske republike, ki jo zastopata G. de Bergues in J.-C. Niollet, zastopnika, intervenientka,
PARLIAMENT v COUNCIL having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 20 June 2007, after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 27 September 2007, gives the following
PARLAMENT PROTI SVETU na podlagi pisnega postopka in obravnave z dne 20. junija 2007, po predstavitvi sklepnih predlogov generalnega pravobranilca na obravnavi 27. septembra 2007 izreka naslednjo
By its application, the European Parliament seeks, primarily, the annulment of Articles 29(1) and (2) and 36(3) of Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005 on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status (OJ 2005 L 326, p.
Evropski parlament s tožbo predlaga razglasitev ničnosti členov 29(1) in (2) ter 36(3) Direktive Sveta 2005/85/ES z dne 1. decembra 2005 o minimalnih standardih glede postopkov za priznanje ali odvzem statusa begunca v državah članicah (UL L 326, str.
13; ‘the contested provisions’) and, alternatively, the annulment of that directive in its entirety.
13, v nadaljevanju: izpodbijane določbe) in, podredno, razglasitev ničnosti te direktive v celoti.
By order of the President of the Court of Justice of 25 July 2006, the Commission of the European Communities and the French Republic were granted leave to intervene in support of the forms of order sought by the Parliament and the Council of the European Union respectively.
Komisiji Evropskih skupnosti in Francoski republiki je bila s sklepom predsednika Sodi�ča z dne 25. julija 2006 dovoljena intervencija v podporo predlogom Parlamenta oziroma Sveta Evropske unije.
JUDGMENT OF 6. 5.
SODBA Z DNE 6. 5.
2008 — CASE C-133/06
2008 – ZADEVA C-133/06
Relevant provisions of the EC Treaty
Upoštevne določbe Pogodbe ES
The first paragraph of Article 63 EC in Title IV of the Treaty, headed ‘Visas, asylum, immigration and other policies related to free movement of persons’, provides:
Člen 63, prvi odstavek, ES pod naslovom IV „Vizumi, azil, priseljevanje in druge politike v zvezi s prostim gibanjem oseb“ predvideva:
‘The Council, acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 67 [EC], shall, within a period of five years after the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam, adopt:
„Svet v skladu s postopkom iz člena 67 [ES] v petletnem obdobju po začetku veljavnosti Amsterdamske pogodbe sprejme:
(1) measures on asylum …, within the following areas:
1) ukrepe, ki se nana�ajo na azil, […] na naslednjih področjih:
(d) minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting or withdrawing refugee status;
[…] d) minimalni standardi glede postopkov za priznanje ali odvzem statusa begunca v državah članicah;
(a) minimum standards for giving temporary protection to displaced persons from third countries who cannot return to their country of origin and for persons who otherwise need international protection;
2) ukrepe, ki se nana�ajo na begunce in razseljene osebe, na naslednjih področjih: a) minimalni standardi za dodelitev začasne za�čite razseljenim osebam iz tretjih držav, ki se ne morejo vrniti v izvorno državo, in osebam, ki sicer potrebujejo mednarodno za�čito;
Article 67 EC, as amended by the Treaty of Nice, provides:
Člen 67 ES, kot je bil spremenjen s Pogodbo iz Nice, določa:
After this period of five years:
Po tem petletnem obdobju:
— the Council shall act on proposals from the Commission; the Commission shall examine any request made by a Member State that it submit a proposal to the Council;
– Svet odloča na podlagi predlogov Komisije; Komisija preuči vsako pro�njo države članice, naj pri Svetu vloži predlog;
— the Council, acting unanimously after consulting the European Parliament, shall take a decision with a view to providing for all or parts of the areas covered by this title to be governed by the procedure referred to in Article 251 [EC] and adapting the provisions relating to the powers of the Court of Justice.
– Svet po posvetovanju z Evropskim parlamentom soglasno sprejme sklep, s katerim zagotovi, da vsa področja ali dele področij iz tega naslova ureja postopek iz člena 251 [ES], in prilagodi določbe o pristojnostih Sodi�ča.
By derogation from paragraph 1, the Council shall adopt, in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251 [EC]:
Z odstopanjem od odstavka 1 sprejme Svet v skladu s postopkom iz člena 251 [ES]:
— the measures provided for in Article 63(1) and (2)(a) [EC] provided that the Council has previously adopted, in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article, Community legislation defining the common rules and basic principles governing these issues,
– ukrepe, predvidene v členu 63(1) in (2)(a) [ES], če je Svet pred tem v skladu z odstavkom 1 tega člena sprejel zakonodajo Skupnosti, ki opredeljuje skupna pravila in temeljna načela glede teh vpra�anj;
Secondary legislation prior to Directive 2005/85
Sekundarna zakonodaja pred Direktivo 2005/85
Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national (OJ 2003 L 50, p.
Na podlagi člena 63, prvi odstavek, točka 1(a) in (b), ES sta bili sprejeti Uredba Sveta (ES) �t.
1) and Council Directive 2003/9/EC of 27 January 2003 laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers (OJ 2003 L 31, p.
343/2003 z dne 18. februarja 2003 o vzpostavitvi meril in mehanizmov za določitev države članice, odgovorne za obravnavanje pro�nje za azil, ki jo v eni od držav članic vloži državljan tretje države (UL L 50, str.
18) were adopted on the basis of point 1(a) and (b) respectively of the first paragraph of Article 63 EC.
1), oziroma Direktiva Sveta 2003/9/ES z dne 27. januarja 2003 o minimalnih standardih za sprejem prosilcev za azil (UL L 31, str. 18).
Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as
Na podlagi člena 63, prvi odstavek, točke 1(c), 2(a) in 3(a), ES je bila sprejeta Direktiva Sveta 2004/83/ES z dne 29. aprila 2004 o minimalnih standardih glede pogojev, ki jih morajo izpolnjevati državljani tretjih držav ali osebe brez državljanstva, da se
PARLIAMENT v COUNCIL persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted (OJ 2004 L 304, p.
PARLAMENT PROTI SVETU jim prizna status begunca ali osebe, ki iz drugih razlogov potrebuje mednarodno za�čito, in o vsebini te za�čite (UL L 304, str. 12).
Council Decision 2004/927/EC of 22 December 2004 providing for certain areas covered by Title IV of Part Three of the Treaty establishing the European Community to be governed by the procedure laid down in Article 251 of that Treaty (OJ 2004 L 396, p.
Na podlagi člena 67(2), druga alinea, ES, je bil sprejet Sklep Sveta 2004/927/ES z dne 22. decembra 2004 o uporabi postopka iz člena 251 Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti za določena področja iz naslova IV tretjega dela te pogodbe (UL L 396, str. 45).
Article 1(2) of that decision provides:
Člen 1(2) tega sklepa določa:
‘As from 1 January 2005 the Council shall act in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 251 [EC] when adopting measures referred to in Article 63(2)(b) and (3)(b) [EC].’
„Od 1. januarja 2005 Svet pri sprejemu ukrepov iz člena 63[, točka 2](b) in [točka 3](b), [ES] odloča v skladu s postopkom iz člena 251 [ES].“
Recital 4 in the preamble to the decision points out that the decision does not affect the provisions of Article 67(5) EC.
V četrti uvodni izjavi istega sklepa je poudarjeno, da ta sklep ne vpliva na določbe člena 67(5) ES.
Directive 2005/85 was adopted on the basis, in particular, of point 1(d) of the first paragraph of Article 63 EC.
Direktiva 2005/85 je bila sprejeta zlasti na podlagi člena 63, prvi odstavek, točka 1(d), ES.
According to Article 1, the purpose of the directive is to establish minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status.
V skladu s členom 1 navedene direktive je njen namen določiti minimalne standarde glede postopkov za priznanje ali odvzem statusa begunca v državah članicah.
Recitals 17 and 18 in the preamble to the directive state:
Sedemnajsta in osemnajsta uvodna izjava te direktive določata:
Where a third country can be regarded as a safe country of origin, Member States should be able to designate it as safe and presume its safety for a particular applicant, unless he/she presents serious counter-indications.
Če je možno tretjo državo �teti za varno izvorno državo, bi bilo treba državam članicam omogočiti, da jo označijo za varno in da domnevajo, da je varna tudi za posameznega prosilca, razen če prosilec predloži resne nasprotne dokaze.
Given the level of harmonisation achieved on the qualification of third country nationals and stateless persons as refugees, common criteria for designating third countries as safe countries of origin should be established.’
(18) Glede na raven usklajenosti pogojev, ki jih morajo izpolnjevati državljani tretjih držav in osebe brez državljanstva, da se jim prizna status begunca, bi bilo treba določiti tudi skupna merila za označitev tretjih držav za varne izvorne države.“
With regard to safe countries of origin, recital 19 in the preamble to Directive 2005/85 states:
Glede varnih izvornih držav devetnajsta uvodna izjava Direktive 2005/85 določa:
‘Where the Council has satisfied itself that those criteria are met in relation to a particular country of origin, and has consequently included it in the minimum common list of safe countries of origin to be adopted pursuant to this Directive, Member States should be obliged to consider applications of persons with the nation-
„Če Svet oceni, da določena izvorna država izpolnjuje ta merila in jo na podlagi tega uvrsti na minimalni skupni seznam varnih izvornih držav, ki se sprejme na podlagi te direktive, bi bilo treba države članice obvezati, da obravnavajo pro�nje oseb, ki
PARLIAMENT v COUNCIL ality of that country … on the basis of the rebuttable presumption of the safety of that country.
PARLAMENT PROTI SVETU imajo državljanstvo te države, […] na podlagi izpodbojne domneve o varnosti te države.
In the light of the political importance of the designation of safe countries of origin, in particular in view of the implications of an assessment of the human rights situation in a country of origin and its implications for the policies of the European Union in the field of external relations, the Council should take any decisions on the establishment or amendment of the list, after consultation of the European Parliament.’
Zaradi političnega pomena označitve izvornih držav za varne, �e posebej zaradi posledic ocene spo�tovanja človekovih pravic v izvorni državi in vpliva take ocene na politiko Evropske unije na področju zunanjih zadev, naj Svet vsako odločitev o pripravi ali spremembi takega seznama sprejme po posvetovanju z Evropskim parlamentom.“
With respect to certain European third countries which observe particularly high human rights and refugee protection standards, recital 24 in the preamble to the directive is worded as follows:
Štiriindvajseta uvodna izjava navedene direktive glede določenih tretjih evropskih držav, ki izpolnjujejo posebno visoke standarde varstva človekovih pravic in varstva beguncev, določa:
‘… Member States should be allowed to not carry out, or not to carry out full examination of asylum applications regarding applicants who enter their territory from such European third countries.
„[…] državam članicam [je treba] dopustiti, da jim ni treba preučevati ali da lahko le omejeno preučujejo pro�nje za azil tistih prosilcev, ki vstopijo na njihovo ozemlje iz [navedenih] evropskih tretjih držav […].
Given the potential consequences for the applicant of a restricted or omitted examination, this application of the safe third country concept should be restricted to cases involving third countries with respect to which the Council has satisfied itself that the high standards for the safety of the third country concerned, as set out in this Directive, are fulfilled.
Zaradi možnih posledic, ki bi jih za prosilca lahko imela omejena ali opu�čena preučitev njegove pro�nje, bi morala biti ta uporaba koncepta varne tretje države omejena na primere tretjih držav, glede katerih se je Svet prepričal, da izpolnjujejo visoke standarde varstva, kot so določeni v tej direktivi.
The Council should take decisions in this matter after consultation of the European Parliament.’
Svet bi moral o tem odločati po posvetovanju z Evropskim parlamentom.“
Article 29(1) and (2) of the directive, headed ‘Minimum common list of third countries regarded as safe countries of origin’, provides:
Člen 29(1) in (2) iste direktive z naslovom „Minimalni skupni seznam tretjih držav, ki se �tejejo za varne izvorne države“ določa:
The Council shall, acting by a qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission and after consultation of the European Parliament, adopt a minimum common list of third countries which shall be regarded by Member States as safe countries of origin in accordance with Annex II.
Svet na predlog Komisije in po posvetovanju z Evropskim parlamentom s kvalifi -cirano večino sprejme minimalni skupni seznam tretjih držav, ki jih države članice v skladu s Prilogo II �tejejo za varne države.
The Commission shall examine any request made by the Council or by a Member State to submit a proposal to amend the minimum common list.’
Komisija preuči vsako pro�njo Sveta ali države članice, da naj predloži predlog za spremembo minimalnega skupnega seznama.“
Annex II to Directive 2005/85, headed ‘Designation of safe countries of origin for the purposes of Articles 29 and 30(1)’, defines the criteria by which a country may be designated as a safe country of origin as follows:
Priloga II k Direktivi 2005/85 z naslovom „Označitev držav za varne izvorne države za namene členov 29 in 30(1)“ opredeljuje merila, ki omogočajo označitev države za varno izvorno državo, tako:
‘A country is considered as a safe country of origin where, on the basis of the legal situation, the application of the law within a democratic system and the general political circumstances, it can be shown that there is generally and consistently no persecution as defined in Article 9 of Directive 2004/83/EC, no torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and no threat by reason of indiscriminate violence in situations of international or internal armed conflict.
„Država se �teje za varno izvorno državo, če se na podlagi pravnega položaja, uporabe prava v okviru demokratičnega sistema in splo�nih političnih okoli�čin lahko sklepa, da tam na splo�no in redno ni nikakr�nega preganjanja, kakor je opredeljeno v členu 9 Direktive 2004/83/ES, ni mučenja ali nečlove�kega ali ponižujočega ravnanja ali kaznovanja in ni ogroženosti zaradi vsesplo�nega nasilja v razmerah mednarodnega ali notranjega oboroženega spopada.
(a) the relevant laws and regulations of the country and the manner in which they are applied;
Pri ocenjevanju se med drugim upo�teva tudi obseg zagotavljanja varnosti pred preganjanjem ali zlorabami z: a) ustreznimi zakoni in predpisi države in načinom, na katerega se ti uporabljajo;
(b) observance of the rights and freedoms laid down in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and/or the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights and/or the Convention against Torture, in particular the rights from which derogation cannot be made under Article 15(2) of the said European Convention;
PARLAMENT PROTI SVETU b) spo�tovanjem pravic in svobo�čin, določenih v Evropski konvenciji o varstvu človekovih pravic in temeljnih svobo�čin in/ali v Mednarodnem paktu o državljanskih in političnih pravicah in/ali v Konvenciji proti mučenju, zlasti pa pravic, od katerih v skladu s členom 15(2) Evropske konvencije ni mogoče odstopati; c) upo�tevanjem načela nevračanja v skladu z Ženevsko konvencijo; d) obstojem sistema učinkovitih pravnih sredstev zoper kr�itve teh pravic in svobo�čin.“
According to Article 36(1) to (3) of Directive 2005/85, headed ‘The European safe third countries concept’:
Člen 36, od (1) do (3), Direktive 2005/85 z naslovom „Koncept evropske varne tretje države“ določa:
Member States may provide that no, or no full, examination of the asylum application and of the safety of the applicant in his/her particular circumstances as described in Chapter II, shall take place in cases where a competent authority has established, on the basis of the facts, that the applicant for asylum is seeking to enter or has entered illegally into its territory from a safe third country according to paragraph 2.
Države članice lahko predvidijo, da se, kadar pristojni organ na podlagi dejstev ugotovi, da prosilec posku�a nezakonito vstopiti ali da je nezakonito vstopil na ozemlje države članice iz varne tretje države iz odstavka 2, ne opravi obravnavanje ali ne opravi celovito obravnavanje pro�nje za azil in varnosti prosilca glede na njegove osebne okoli�čine, kot je navedeno v Poglavju II.
(c) it has ratified the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and observes its provisions, including the standards relating to effective remedies; and
Za namene odstavka 1 se tretja država lahko �teje za varno tretjo državo samo, če: a) je ratificirala in spo�tuje določbe Ženevske konvencije brez kakr�nih koli geografskih omejitev; b) ima z zakonom predpisan azilni postopek; c) je ratificirala Evropsko konvencijo o varstvu človekovih pravic in temeljnih svobo�čin ter spo�tuje njene določbe, vključno s standardi za učinkovita pravna sredstva; in d) jo za varno označi Svet v skladu z odstavkom 3.
The Council shall, acting by qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission and after consultation of the European Parliament, adopt or amend a common list of third countries that shall be regarded as safe third countries for the purposes of paragraph 1.’
Svet na predlog Komisije in po posvetovanju z Evropskim parlamentom s kvalificirano večino sprejme ali spremeni skupen seznam tretjih držav, ki se �tejejo za varne tretje države za namene odstavka 1.“
The Council did not apply the contested provisions in the adoption of the two lists provided for by those provisions.
Svet ni uporabil izpodbijanih določb pri sprejetju dveh seznamov, predvidenih v navedenih določbah.
In support of its application for annulment, the Parliament raises four pleas in law: infringement of the EC Treaty stemming from disregard of the first indent of Article 67(5) EC; the Council’s lack of competence to enact the contested provisions; breach of the duty to state reasons for those provisions; and, finally, failure to comply with the obligation to cooperate in good faith.
Parlament v podporo tožbi navaja �tiri ničnostne tožbene razloge, in sicer kr�itev Pogodbe ES, ki je posledica kr�itve člena 67(5), prva alinea, ES, nepristojnost Sveta za sprejetje izpodbijanih določb, kr�itev obveznosti obrazložitve teh določb in nazadnje nespo�tovanje obveznosti lojalnega sodelovanja.
The first two pleas should be examined together, since they are indissociable, as the Advocate General noted at point 11 of his Opinion.
Prva tožbena razloga je treba obravnavati skupaj, saj sta nerazdružljiva, kar poudarja tudi generalni pravobranilec v točki 11 sklepnih predlogov.
The first two pleas, alleging an infringement of the first indent of Article 67(5) EC and the Council’s lack of competence
Prva tožbena razloga v zvezi s kršitvijo člena 67(5), prva alinea, ES in nepristojnostjo Sveta
The Parliament submits that, in view of the Community legislation that was already adopted, namely Regulation No 343/2003 and Directives 2003/9 and 2004/83, the adoption of Directive 2005/85 constituted the final legislative stage in the adoption of common rules and basic principles the implementation of which was intended to enable the transition to be made to the procedure laid down in Article 251 EC (‘the co-decision procedure’), in accordance with the requirements of the first indent of Article 67(5) EC.
Parlament trdi, da je ob upo�tevanju že sprejete zakonodaje Skupnosti, in sicer Uredbe �t. 343/2003 ter direktiv 2003/9 in 2004/83, sprejetje Direktive 2005/85 pomenilo zadnjo zakonodajno fazo pri sprejetju skupnih pravil in temeljnih načel, katerih izvajanje bi v skladu z zahtevami iz člena 67(5), prva alinea, ES omogočalo prehod na postopek iz člena 251 ES (v nadaljevanju: postopek soodločanja).
Therefore, the subsequent adoption of the minimum common list of third countries regarded as safe countries of origin and the common list of European safe third countries (together: ‘the lists of safe countries’) should proceed in accordance with the co-decision procedure.
Zato bi bilo treba poznej�i minimalni skupni seznam tretjih držav, ki se �tejejo za varne izvorne države, in skupen seznam evropskih varnih tretjih držav (v nadaljevanju skupaj: seznama varnih držav) sprejeti na podlagi postopka soodločanja.
By the contested provisions, the Council therefore unlawfully made use, in an act of secondary legislation, of legal bases enabling it to adopt the lists of safe countries by way of a procedure requiring only the consultation of the Parliament.
Svet je tako z izpodbijanimi določbami v aktu sekundarne zakonodaje nezakonito izvedel pravne podlage, ki so mu omogočale sprejetje seznamov varnih držav v skladu s postopkom, ki zahteva le posvetovanje s Parlamentom.
According to the Parliament, by creating a secondary legal basis in this way, the Council ‘reserved to itself a right to legislate’.
Svet si je z ustvarjanjem izvedene pravne podlage dodelil „pridržek zakonodaje“.
However, nowhere does the Treaty provide for the Council to be able to establish new legal bases for the purposes of the adoption of secondary legislation outside the existing procedures for the adoption of legislative acts and implementing measures.
Vendar ni v Pogodbi nikjer določeno, da lahko Svet, razen v okviru obstoječih postopkov sprejemanja zakonodajnih in izvedbenih aktov, ustvarja nove pravne podlage za sprejetje izvedenih zakonodajnih določb.
The Parliament takes the view that the possible existence of a Council practice of establishing secondary legal bases cannot serve as justification.
Parlament meni, da morebitna praksa Sveta, ki bi pomenila ustvarjanje izvedenih pravnih podlag, ne bi bila upravičena.