fleetcommandJavítottam az elszúrt fordítást, köszönöm az észrevételt.
Talán még annyi kiegészítést tennék hozzá, hogy olyan próbálkozás is van, amely alacsonyabb szintű jogszabállyá akarja süllyeszteni a 138-as kiegészítést, illetve olyan is, amely a tartalmát változtatná meg, hogy a lényeget, miszerint egy felhasználó sem figyelhető meg stb., valahogy kiüsse.
Sajnos a jogi csűrés-csavarás bonyolult tud lenni.
" * ITRE MEPs must advise Catherine Trautmann to refuse a weak compromise with the council which neutralizes it by making it a recital instead of an article and they should vote for amendment 46 (which exactly restates amendment 138).
* Right before the elections, it's a perfect way to show the usefulness of the European Parliament, and its commitment to protecting the rights and freedoms of its citizens.
* Amendment 138 was approved by 88% of the European Parliament in first reading on September 24, 2008. It has been accepted by the Commission, and Mrs Reding herself said that “The Commission considers this amendment to be an important restatement of key legal principles of the Community legal order, especially of citizens' fundamental rights.”
* Amendment 138 is protective of users' rights. It reinforces a fundamental principle of European law: except where public security is directly threatened, only a judge can impose conditions -- a sentence under law -- that restrict a citizen's fundamental rights and freedoms.
The original amendment 138:
Applying the principle that no restriction may be imposed
on the fundamental rights and freedoms of end-users,
without a prior ruling by the judicial authorities,
notably in accordance with Article 11 of the Charter of
Fundamental Rights of the European Union on freedom of
expression and information, save when public security
is threatened in which case the ruling may be subsequent.
* It is directly opposed to "graduated response" (or "three strikes") schemes such as the one being deployed in France (yet it's not a purely French problem, because other EU states are considering such a scheme, and at some point it was sneaked into the Telecoms Package). It also opposes other forms of private, nonjudicial, parallel "justice" that would be dangerous for everyone's civil liberties.
* The Council removed it, with no justification, under heavy pressure from Nicolas Sarkozy, thus voiding a decision of 88% of the Parliament.
* No compromise should be accepted that doesn't protect civil freedoms as well as the original amendment does. As a recital instead of an article, it loses all protective power. (The current state of the compromise between the rapporteur and the Council is a weak recital.)
* It is a strong signal to the EU citizens at a time when EU institutions face a deep crisis of confidence.
"