Traduction de «Protocol interpretation » (Anglais → Français) :

Protocol drawn up on the basis of article K.3 of the Treaty on the European Union, on the interpretation, by way of preliminary rulings, by the Court of Justice of the European Communities of the Convention on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests | Protocol on the interpretation, by way of preliminary rulings, by the Court of Justice of the European Communities of the Convention on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests

Protocol on the interpretation by the Court of Justice of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgements in civil and commercial matters

interpretative protocol

deliver advocacy interpreting services | supply advocacy interpreting services | provide advocacy interpreting services | providing advocacy interpreting service

conduct and interpret EMGs | interpret nerve conduction tests | interpret electromyograms | interpret EMG

interpreting language in live broadcasting shows | provide interpretation of languages in live broadcasting shows | interpret languages in live broadcasting shows | interpreting of languages in live broadcasting shows

sign interpreter [ sign-language interpreter | sign language interpreter | oral-manual interpreter | manual interpreter ]

Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol | TCP/IP | Transmission Control Protocol/Internetwork Protocol | Transfer Control Protocol/Internet Protocol | TCP/IP protocol | TCP/IP protocol suite | TCP/IP suite | TCP/IP family

both-ways consecutive [ consecutive liaison interpreting | liaison interpreting | informal interpretation ]

73. Stresses its serious concerns about the work carried out within the Council of Europe’s Cybercrime Convention Committee with a view to developing an additional protocol on the interpretation of Article 32 of the Convention on Cybercrime of 23 November 2001 on ‘trans-border access to stored computer data with consent or where publicly available’ in order to ’facilitate its effective use and implementation in the light of legal, policy and technological developments’; calls on the Commission and the Member States, in view of the forthcoming consideration by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, to ensure the compatibili ...[+++]ty of the provision of Article 32 of the Convention on Cybercrime, and its interpretation in the Member States, with fundamental rights, including data protection and, in particular, the provisions on trans-border flows of personal data, as enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the EU data protection acquis , the European Convention of Human Rights and the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Individuals with Regard to Automatic Processing (‘Convention 108’), which are legally binding upon the Member States; calls on the Commission and the Member States to reject firmly any measure that would put the application of these rights at risk; is alarmed by the fact that should such an additional protocol be endorsed, its implementation could result in unfettered remote access by law enforcement authorities on servers and computer systems located in other jurisdictions, without recourse to MLA agreements and other instruments of judicial cooperation put in place to guarantee the fundamental rights of the individual, including data protection and due process;

73. Stresses its serious concerns about the work carried out within the Council of Europe’s Cybercrime Convention Committee with a view to developing an additional protocol on the interpretation of Article 32 of the Convention on Cybercrime of 23 November 2001 on ‘trans-border access to stored computer data with consent or where publicly available’ in order to ‘facilitate its effective use and implementation in the light of legal, policy and technological developments’; calls on the Commission and the Member States, in view of the forthcoming consideration by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, to  ensure the compatibil ...[+++]ity of the provision of Article 32 of the Convention on Cybercrime, and its interpretation in the Member States, with fundamental rights, including data protection and, in particular, the provisions on trans-border flows of personal data, as enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the EU data protection acquis, the European Convention of Human Rights and the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Individuals with Regard to Automatic Processing (‘Convention 108’), which are legally binding upon the Member States; calls on the Commission and the Member States to reject firmly any measure that would put the application of these rights at risk; is alarmed by the fact that should such an additional protocol be endorsed, its implementation could result in unfettered remote access by law enforcement authorities on servers and computer systems located in other jurisdictions, without recourse to MLA agreements and other instruments of judicial cooperation put in place to guarantee the fundamental rights of the individual, including data protection and due process;

73. Stresses its serious concerns about the work carried out within the Council of Europe’s Cybercrime Convention Committee with a view to developing an additional protocol on the interpretation of Article 32 of the Convention on Cybercrime of 23 November 2001 on ‘trans-border access to stored computer data with consent or where publicly available’ in order to ‘facilitate its effective use and implementation in the light of legal, policy and technological developments’; calls on the Commission and the Member States, in view of the forthcoming consideration by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, to ensure the compatibili ...[+++]ty of the provision of Article 32 of the Convention on Cybercrime, and its interpretation in the Member States, with fundamental rights, including data protection and, in particular, the provisions on trans-border flows of personal data, as enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the EU data protection acquis , the European Convention of Human Rights and the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Individuals with Regard to Automatic Processing (‘Convention 108’), which are legally binding upon the Member States; calls on the Commission and the Member States to reject firmly any measure that would put the application of these rights at risk; is alarmed by the fact that should such an additional protocol be endorsed, its implementation could result in unfettered remote access by law enforcement authorities on servers and computer systems located in other jurisdictions, without recourse to MLA agreements and other instruments of judicial cooperation put in place to guarantee the fundamental rights of the individual, including data protection and due process;

18. Stresses its serious concerns about the work carried out within the Council of Europe’s Cybercrime Convention Committee with a view to developing an additional protocol on the interpretation of Article 32 of the Convention on Cybercrime of 23 November 2001 on ‘trans-border access to stored computer data with consent or where publicly available’ in order to ‘facilitate its effective use and implementation in the light of legal, policy and technological developments’; calls on the Commission and the Member States, in view of the forthcoming consideration by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, to  ensure the compatibil ...[+++]ity of the provision of Article 32 of the Convention on Cybercrime, and its interpretation in the Member States, with fundamental rights, including data protection and, in particular, the provisions on trans-border flows of personal data, as enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the EU data protection acquis, the European Convention of Human Rights and the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Individuals with Regard to Automatic Processing (‘Convention 108’), which are legally binding upon the Member States; calls on the Commission and the Member States to reject firmly any measure that would put the application of these rights at risk; is alarmed by the fact that should such an additional protocol be endorsed, its implementation could result in unfettered remote access by law enforcement authorities on servers and computer systems located in other jurisdictions, without recourse to MLA agreements and other instruments of judicial cooperation put in place to guarantee the fundamental rights of the individual, including data protection and due process;