Traduction de «inmate redress information system » (Anglais → Français) :

Inmate Redress Information System [ IRIS | Automated Inmate Redress System ]

Inmate Redress System

Inmate Document and Record Information System

4. Stresses that a better exchange of information between Member States is needed; calls on all Member States to create or assign a national focal point to which businesses and other victims of misleading practices can report them and can obtain information on judicial and non-judicial means of redress, as well as help and expertise regarding the prevention and tackling of various forms of fraud; considers that each focal point s ...[+++]hould maintain a database recording all types of misleading marketing practices and including easy-to-understand examples; calls on the Commission to ensure coordination of a smooth exchange of information from the national databases, inter alia by facilitating the setting-up of a rapid alert system identifying new practices, whilst taking account of the budgetary limitations;

(Return tabled) Question No. 1305 Hon. Irwin Cotler: With regard to Bill C-10, in the year after it received royal assent: (a) broken down by offence, how many people have been charged for offences created by the bill; (b) broken down by offence, how many people have been convicted of offences created by the bill; (c) broken down by offence, what sentences have been issued to people convicted of offences created by the bill; (d) broken down by offence, how many people have been charged under the provisions of the bill; (e) broken down by offence, how many people have been convicted under the provisions of the bill; (f) broken down by offence, how many people have been sentenced under the provisions of the bill; (g) broken down by offe ...[+++]nce, what sentences have been issued to people sentenced under the provisions of the bill; (h) in how many of the cases in (d) was a constitutional argument raised by the offender (i) at trial, (ii) on appeal; (i) broken down by geographic jurisdiction and instance, how many cases in (d) are pending (i) at the trial level, (ii) on appeal; (j) how much money has the government spent on prosecutions under the provisions of the bill; (k) how much money has the government spent defending the constitutionality of the bill; (l) in what cases, if any, did the bill provide for punishment where none was provided for under previously-existing provisions of the Criminal Code; (m) broken down by offence and length of sentence, in what cases, if any, did an offender sentenced under the provisions of the bill receive a longer sentence than what was allowed for under previously-existing provisions of the Criminal Code; (n) in what ways has the bill made streets and communities safer; (o) in what ways, if any, has the government reviewed the effectiveness of the bill; (p) what were the results of any such reviews; (q) what reviews of the effectiveness of the bill, if any, are ongoing; (r) when will the results of any such reviews be ma ...

19. Recalls the importance of effective redress mechanism as a means of ensuring that consumers can pursue their rights; emphasises the fact that, over the years, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) systems and the SOLVIT network have proved to be simple, fast and cost-effective in solving problems affecting citizens, such as those linked to recognition of professional qualifications, portability of pension funds of mobile workers and free movement and residence of EU citizens, notes, nevertheless, that Europe’s ADR landscape remain ...[+++]s largely fragmented and the SOLVIT network largely underused; stresses that citizens should be better informed about these redress mechanisms and problem-solving tools with a view to the facilitation of consumer redress in cross-border purchases of goods and services; welcomes the Commission’s legislative proposals on the use of ADR and Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) and underlines the importance of their effective adoption, as well as of promoting wider use of mediation; urges the Commission to ensure that a legally binding framework is prepared in the field of collective redress;

the European approach to collective redress must be founded on the opt-in principle, whereby victims are clearly identified and take part in the procedure only if they have expressly indicated their wish to do so, in order to avoid potential abuses; underlines the need to respect existing national systems, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity; calls on the Commission to consider a system which will provide ...[+++] relevant information to all potential victims involved, increase the representativeness of collective actions, allow for the largest number of victims to seek compensation and ensure simple, affordable and effective access to justice for EU citizens, thereby avoiding excessive litigation and subsequent unnecessary individual or collective actions concerning the same infringement; calls on the Member States to put in place efficient mechanisms ensuring that as many victims as possible are informed and made aware of their rights and obligations, in particular when they are domiciled in several Member States, whilst avoiding unduly harming the reputation of the party concerned, in order to respect the principle of the presumption of innocence;