Vertaling van "does not include strict " (Nederlands → Frans) :

− We voted against this agreement because: it aims to return people to a country where, according to the UNHCR Global Appeal 2010–2011, around 212 000 people were internally displaced for more than 16 years, living in need of shelter and means to become self-sufficient, where sexual and gender-based violence is rife in all parts of society and police ill-treatment is tolerated; it also applies to those former residents of Abkhazia and South Ossetia who do not have any de facto links to Georgia; it does not include strict safeguards concerning the violation of fundamental rights and guaranteeing high standards of reception, which are poor in Georgia; it contains numerous loopholes and ambiguities which might be clarified in the Joint Readmission Committee in which Parliament regrettably has no say, which would be entirely legitimate regarding its new competences; it does not guarantee adequately the protection of personal data – data can be forwarded to ‘other bodies’ without requiring the consent of the person involved.
– (EN) Nous avons voté contre cet accord parce qu’il vise à renvoyer des personnes dans un pays où, selon l’appel mondial de 2010-2011 du haut commissaire des Nations unies pour les réfugiés (HCRNU), quelque 212 000 personnes ont été déplacées à l’intérieur du pays pendant plus de 16 ans, sont en attente d’un toit et ont besoin de protection et de moyens pour devenir autonomes, où la violence à caractère sexuel et fondée sur le genre règne dans toutes les couches de la société et où les mauvais traitements de la police sont tolérés; il s’applique aussi aux anciens résidents d’Abkhazie et d’Ossétie du Sud qui n’ont pas de liens de facto avec la Géorgie; il n’inclut pas de sauvegardes strictes concernant la violation des droits fondamentaux et garantissant des normes d’accueil élevées, qui sont médiocres en Géorgie; des lacunes y sont relevées, ainsi que de nombreuses ambiguïtés qui pourraient être levées au sein du comité de réadmission mixte, dans lequel le Parlement n’a malheureusement pas voix au chapitre, alors que ce serait tout à fait légitime au vu de ses nouvelles compétences; il ne garantit pas suffisamment la protection des données à caractère personnel, qui peuvent être transmises à d’«autres instances» sans que le consentement de la personne concernée ne soit demandé.

Nieuw-Zeeland (Artikel 19 : (1) Everyone has the right to freedom from discrimination on the grounds of discrimination in the Human Rights Act 1993 (2) Measures taken in good faith for the purpose of assisting or advancing persons or groups of persons disadvantaged because of discrimination that is unlawful by virtue of part II of the Human Rights Act 1993 do not constitute discrimination), Canada (Artikel 15(2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability) en Zuid-Afrika (artikel 8,3) voorzien een meer algemene bepaling over positieve actie.
La Constitution néo-zélandaise (Article 19 : (1) Everyone has the right to freedom from discrimination on the grounds of discrimination in the Human Rights Act 1993 (2) Measures taken in good faith for the purpose of assisting or advancing persons or groups of persons disadvantaged because of discrimination that is unlawful by virtue of part II of the Human Rights Act 1993 do not constitute discrimination), la Constitution canadienne (Article 15(2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability) et la Constitution sud-africaine (article 8,3) contiennent une disposition de portée plus générale en ce qui concerne le principe des actions positives.

Should Cyprus decides to apply this Decision according to Article 2 (3), Cyprus would be obliged to recognize all documents cover by Article 2 (1) and (2) including visas with limited territorial validity issued to nationals of Kosovo, although it does not yet recognize Kosovo, until Cyprus is fully implementing the Schengen aquis.
Should Cyprus decides to apply this Decision according to Article 2 (3), Cyprus would be obliged to recognize all documents cover by Article 2 (1) and (2) including visas with limited territorial validity issued to nationals of Kosovo, although it does not yet recognize Kosovo, until Cyprus is fully implementing the Schengen aquis.