Traduction de «condanna » (Italien → Anglais) :

E. whereas Sotoudeh’s sentence is part of a systematic assault on human rights lawyers and activists in Iran, which includes the sentencing on 7 January 2011 of Shiva Nazarahari, co-founder of Committee of Human Rights Reporters and a prominent activist, to four years in prison and 74 lashes and the sentencing on 30 October 2010 of a prominent lawyer, Mohammad Seifzadeh, to nine years in prison and a ten-year ban from practising law; whereas human rights lawyer Mohammad Oliyafar is serving a one-year sentence for his advocacy on behalf of his clients; whereas other human rights defenders facing imminent prosecution in Iran are Mohammad ...[+++] Ali Dadkhah, Abdolfattah Soltani and Houtan Kian,

E. whereas Sotoudeh's sentence is part of a systematic assault on human rights lawyers and activists in Iran, which includes the sentencing on 7 January 2011 of Shiva Nazarahari, co-founder of Committee of Human Rights Reporters and a prominent activist, to four years in prison and 74 lashes and the sentencing on 30 October 2010 of a prominent lawyer, Mohammad Seifzadeh, to nine years in prison and a ten-year ban from practising law; whereas human rights lawyer Mohammad Oliyafar is serving a one-year sentence for his advocacy on behalf of his clients; whereas other human rights defenders facing imminent prosecution in Iran are Mohamma ...[+++]d Ali Dadkhah, Abdolfattah Soltani and Houtan Kian,

4. In accordance with paragraph 3, paragraph 1 shall not apply to the extent that, had the previous conviction been a national conviction of the Member State conducting the new proceedings, the taking into account of the previous conviction would, according to the national law of that Member State, have had the effect of interfering with, revoking or reviewing the previous conviction or any decision relating to its execution.

[77] 7 Grounds for refusal: (a) where enforcement would run counter to the fundamental principles of the legal system of the requested State; (b) where the requested State considers the offence for which the sentence was passed to be of a political nature or a purely military one; (c) where the requested State considers that there are substantial grounds for believing that the sentence was brought about or aggravated by considerations of race, religion, nationality or political opinion; (d) where enforcement would be contrary to the international undertakings of the requested State; (e) where the act is already the subject of proceedings in the requested State or where the requested State decides to institute proceedings in respect of t ...[+++]he act; (f) where the competent authorities in the requested State have decided not to take proceedings or to drop proceedings already begun, in respect of the same act; (g) where the act was committed outside the territory of the requesting State; (h) where the requested State is unable to enforce the sentence; (i) where the request is grounded on Article 5.e ("if it considers that it cannot itself enforce the sanction, even by having recourse to extradition, and that the other State can") and none of the other conditions mentioned in that article is fulfilled; (j) where the requested State considers that the requesting State is itself able to enforce the sentence; (k) where the age of the sentenced person at the time of the offence was such that he could not have been prosecuted in the requested State; (l) where under the law of the requested State the sentence imposed can no longer be enforced because of the lapse of time; (m) where and to the extent that the sentence imposes a disqualification.

Where the transfer of enforcement of a custodial penalty is accepted, the competent authorities in the administering State must either enforce the penalty imposed in the sentencing State - immediately or through an order - or through a judicial or administrative procedure convert the sentence into a decision of the administering State, thereby substituting the penalty imposed in the sentencing State by a penalty laid down by the law of the administering State for the same offence (Article 8).

The transfer of enforcement of a sentence needs the agreement of the sentencing State and the administering State and may take place only if it satisfies all the conditions set out in Article 5 of the Convention, namely: (a) the judgment is final and enforceable; (b) the acts or omissions on account of which the sentence has been imposed constitute one of the offences referred to in Article 1(1)(a) according to the law of the administering State or would constitute such an offence if committed in its territory ("dual criminality"); (c) under the laws of the sentencing State or the administering State, the enforcement is not barred by t ...[+++]ime limitations; (d) final judgment against the sentenced person in respect of the same acts has not been delivered in the administering State; and (e) when a final judgment against the sentenced person in respect of the same acts has been delivered in a third State, the transfer of enforcement would not run counter to the principle of prohibiting double jeopardy.