natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The three disasters selected were among the largest responses requiring substantial coordination. 
Izbrane tri nesreče so bile med tistimi z najobširnejšim odzivom, ki zahteva veliko usklajevanja.
10 Representatives came from the Directorates-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO), Health and Food Safety (SANTE), International Cooperation and Development (DEVCO) and Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations (NEAR). 
10 Predstavniki so bili iz GD za humanitarno pomoč in civilno zaščito (ECHO), GD za zdravje in varnost hrane (SANTE), GD za mednarodno sodelovanje in razvoj (DEVCO) in GD za sosedstvo in širitvena pogajanja (NEAR).
Audit scope and approach 14 16 Our work was primarily based on a review of the documents provided by the European Commission and EEAS. 
Obseg revizije in revizijski pristop 14 16 Naše delo je temeljilo predvsem na pregledu dokumentov, ki sta jih zagotovila Evropska komisija in Evropska služba za zunanje delovanje.
The auditors had access to CECIS. 
Revizorji so imeli dostop do sistema CECIS.
We collected users’ perceptions of the mechanism and the responses to the three crises through a questionnaire sent to and answered by 11 Participating States. 
Mnenja uporabnikov o mehanizmu in odzivih na omenjene tri krize smo zbrali z vprašalnikom, ki je bil poslan 11 sodelujočim državam.
We also attended, in October 2015, the Commission’s conference in Luxembourg on lessons learned from the Ebola outbreak and an information session on medical evacuations (or ‘medevac’) preparation by the Luxembourg Air Rescue services in February 2016. 
Oktobra 2015 smo se udeležili tudi konference Evropske komisije v Luxembourgu o izkušnjah, pridobljenih ob izbruhu ebole, februarja 2016 pa informativnega sestanka o pripravah medicinskih evakuacij (medevac) luksemburške zračne reševalne službe.
Observations 15 The Commission made use of the coordination structures in place but some tools could have been exploited further The Commission activated the mechanism for responding to emergencies on a timely basis but could have gained additional time for mobilising resources through better use of the pre-alert phase 17 When the Commission receives a request for assistance, it must notify the Participating States to that effect as soon as possible11. 
Opažanja 15 Komisija je uporabljala vzpostavljene strukture usklajevanja, vendar bi nekatera orodja lahko bolje izkoristila Komisija je mehanizem za odzivanje na izredne razmere aktivirala pravočasno, vendar bi lahko pridobila dodaten čas za mobilizacijo virov z boljšo uporabo faze vnaprejšnjega opozorila 17 Ko Komisija prejme prošnjo za pomoč, mora o tem obvestiti sodelujoče države, takoj ko je to mogoče.11 Pri vseh treh nesrečah je Komisija prošnjo objavila pravočasno, s čimer je izpolnila svojo obveznost, da nemudoma obvesti sodelujoče države.
18 The formal start of a coordinated EU disaster response begins with activation of the mechanism upon receipt of a request for assistance. 
18 Uradni začetek usklajenega odziva EU na nesreče se začne z aktivacijo mehanizma ob prejemu prošnje za pomoč.
However, there may be signs that a disaster is imminent before any such request is submitted. 
Vendar lahko obstajajo znaki, da nesreča grozi, preden se predloži taka prošnja.
The Commission can, but is not obliged to, open an emergency in CECIS ahead of activation in a so-called ‘pre-alert mode’. 
Komisija lahko, vendar ni dolžna, pred aktivacijo mehanizma v sistemu CECIS vklopi opozorilo o izrednih razmerah v tako imenovanem „načinu vnaprejšnjega opozorila”.
This enables the Participating States to mobilise their assets ahead of a potential activation. 
To sodelujočim državam članicam omogoči, da mobilizirajo svoje vire pred morebitno aktivacijo mehanizma.
The pre-alert mode was used in all three disasters. 
Način vnaprejšnjega opozorila je bil uporabljen pri vseh treh nesrečah.
For the floods in Bosnia and Herzegovina (which can be considered a ‘slow-onset’ disaster), the magnitude of the threat was already clear when a state of natural disaster had been declared locally. 
Pri poplavah v Bosni in Hercegovini (ki lahko štejejo za nesrečo s počasnim začetkom) je bila razsežnost nevarnosti jasna že, ko je bilo razglašeno stanje naravne nesreče na lokalni ravni.
However, the pre-alert mode was activated 1 day later, only 4 hours ahead of official activation. 
Vendar pa naj bi bil način vnaprejšnjega opozorila vključen en dan pozneje, samo štiri ure pred uradno aktivacijo mehanizma.
19 The Commission kept no written log of any informal contacts made with Participating States having close ties to and a good knowledge of the affected country. 
19 Komisija ni vodila nobene pisne evidence o neformalnih stikih s sodelujočimi državami, ki imajo tesne vezi s prizadetimi državami in jih dobro poznajo.
Such a log would allow for follow-up on previous activations, which could help build a systematic approach, saving valuable time at the activation stage as well as ensuring good coverage of Participating States that are in a good position to assist an affected country. 
Takšna evidenca bi omogočila nadaljnje spremljanje preteklih aktivacij mehanizma, kar bi pripomoglo k pripravi sistematičnega pristopa, prihranilo dragocen čas v fazi aktivacije ter zagotovilo dobro pokritost sodelujočih držav, ki lahko pomagajo prizadeti državi.
11 Article 16(3)(a)(i) of the Decision. 
11 Člen 16(3)(a)(i) Sklepa.
Observations 16 EU civil protection teams facilitated on-the-ground coordination but their selection process and reporting from the field had shortcomings 20 When there is a need for EU coordination on the ground after Participating States’ offers of assistance are accepted by the requesting party, the Commission should put together an EU civil protection coordination and assessment team (EUCP team) for immediate deployment to the affected country12. 
Opažanja 16 Ekipe EU za civilno zaščito so omogočale lažje usklajevanje na terenu, vendar sta postopek njihovega izbora in poročanje s terena imela pomanjkljivosti 20 Kadar je po tem, ko država prosilka sprejme ponudbo pomoči sodelujočih držav, potrebno usklajevanje na terenu na ravni EU, mora Komisija oblikovati ekipo EU za usklajevanje in ocenjevanje na področju civilne zaščite (ekipa EUCP) za takojšnjo napotitev v prizadeto državo.12 Cilj te ekipe je usklajevanje dela različnih ekip in modulov sodelujočih držav na terenu13, tehnično svetovanje in olajševanje usklajevanja s prizadeto državo.
As illustrated in Annex I, the teams are selected by the Commission following nominations of experts by the Participating States, and each team is accompanied by a Liaison Officer deployed by the Commission. 
Kot je prikazano v Prilogi I, ekipe izbere Komisija po prejemu imenovanj strokovnjakov, ki jih pošljejo sodelujoče države članice, vsako ekipo pa spremlja uradnik za zvezo, ki ga napoti Komisija.
21 The deployment of EUCP teams is not dependent upon the approval of the requesting/affected country for disasters outside the Union. 
21 Napotitev ekip EUCP pri nesrečah zunaj Unije ni odvisna od odobritve države prosilke/prizadete države.
The ERCC is therefore not prohibited from sending Participating States requests for nominations as soon as a request for assistance has been received. 
Centru za usklajevanje nujnega odziva zato ni prepovedano, da pošlje sodelujočim državam zahtevek za imenovanja takoj po prejetju prošnje za pomoč.
In the cases of Nepal and Bosnia and Herzegovina, there were early indications that the disasters were major and that, as a consequence, EU coordination would most likely be needed. 
V primerih Nepala ter Bosne in Hercegovine so obstajali znaki, da sta nesreči hudi in da bo posledično najverjetneje potrebno usklajevanje na ravni EU.
Nevertheless, in both disasters, the time which elapsed from the receipt of the official request for assistance to the request in CECIS for nominations for the first team was 21.4 hours for Bosnia and Herzegovina and 22.8 hours for Nepal, as shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4. 
Kljub temu je pri teh nesrečah znašal čas, ki je pretekel od prejema uradne prošnje za pomoč do zahtevka za imenovanja v sistemu CECIS za prvo ekipo, 21,4 ure za Bosno in Hercegovino in 22,8 ure za Nepal, kot je prikazano na sliki 3 in sliki 4.
Timeline for selection of EUCP experts — Bosnia and Herzegovina 12 Article 16(3)(a)(ii) of the Decision. 
Časovni potek izbora strokovnjakov ekipe EUCP – Bosna in Hercegovina 12 Člen 16(3)(a)(ii) sklepa.
13 COM(2010) 600 final of 26 October 2010, ‘Towards a stronger European disaster response: the role of civil protection and humanitarian assistance’. 
13 COM(2010) 600 final z dne 26. oktobra 2010: Za učinkovitejše evropsko odzivanje na nesreče: vloga civilne zaščite in humanitarne pomoči.
Modules can consist of either civil protection assets or human resources, or a combination of both. 
Module lahko sestavljajo bodisi sredstva ali človeški viri na področju civilne zaščite ali kombinacija obojih.
1 day and 19 hours from the request for assistance to the appointment of the EUCP team 0 20 40 52.6 4.1 60 21.4 80 15.9 6.4 Floods Source: European Court of Auditors. 
0 20 40 Poplave Vir: Evropsko računsko sodišče. Skupaj od prošnje za pomoč do imenovanja ekipe EUCP: 1 dan in 19 ur.
Pre-alert Request for assistance Request for experts 100 Hours Acceptance Deadline for offers Figure 3 
100 ure Sprejem pomoči 52,6 4,1 60 21,4 80 Vnaprejšnje opozorilo Prošnja za pomoč Zahtevek za strokovnjake Rok za oddajo ponudb 15,9 6,4 Slika 3
Observations 17 Timeline for selection of EUCP experts — Nepal 2 days and 2 hours from the request for assistance to the appointment of the EUCP team 0 Earthquake Pre-alert Request for assistance Request for experts Deadline Acceptance for offers 8.4 Source: European Court of Auditors. 
Opažanja 17 Časovni potek izbora strokovnjakov ekipe EUCP – Nepal Skupaj od prošnje za pomoč do imenovanja ekipe EUCP: 2 dneva in 2 uri. Zahtevek za strokovnjake ure 0 8,4 10 4,8 22,8 20 30 40 50 21,8 5,0 60 70 Potres Vnaprejšnje Prošnja opozorilo za pomoč Vir: Evropsko računsko sodišče.
22 10 4.8 Requests for nominations of experts are sent through CECIS with a deadline that is set on a case-by-case basis. 
Zahtevki za imenovanje strokovnjakov se pošiljajo prek sistema CECIS z rokom, ki se določi za vsak primer posebej.
The length of the deadline varied: in Bosnia and Herzegovina it was set at 15.9 hours (a slow-onset disaster) after the request for nominations, while the equivalent for Nepal was 21.8 hours (a sudden-onset dis-aster). 
Roki so bili različni: v primeru Bosne in Hercegovine je bil rok določen na 15,9 ure (nesreča s počasnim začetkom) po predložitvi zahtevka za imenovanje, v primeru Nepala pa na 21,8 ure (nesreča z nenadnim za-četkom).
The auditors found no evidence of internal standards in this regard. 
Revizorji v zvezi s tem niso našli nobenih dokazov o internih standardih.
23 After the deadline for nominations, the selection of experts and the staffing of the team took an additional 5-6 hours. 
23 Po preteku roka za imenovanja je izbor strokovnjakov in osebja ekipe zahteval dodatnih 5–6 ur.
While the legislation sets high-level criteria for expert selection, the Court found that no predefined approach was used to determine which types of experts were needed and how many of each type. 
Zakonodaja določa visoka merila za izbor strokovnjakov, vendar je Sodišče ugotovilo, da za določitev tega, katera področja naj pokrivajo strokovnjaki in koliko strokovnjakov je potrebnih za vsako področje, ni bil uporabljen vnaprej določen pristop.
Moreover, we found no evidence of predefined criteria for selecting each type of expert in the form of checklists to be used during the selection process. 
Poleg tega Sodišče ni našlo dokazov o vnaprej določenih merilih za izbiro strokovnjakov za posamezna področja v obliki kontrolnih seznamov, ki bi se uporabljali med postopkom izbora.
The absence of clear selection criteria was acknowledged in an evaluation carried out in December 201414, which recommended the use of ‘expert profiles for CP team selection’. 
Pomanjkanje jasnih meril za izbor je bilo poudarjeno tudi v vrednotenju, izvedenem decembra 2014,14 v kateri je bila priporočena uporaba strokovnih profilov za izbor ekipe EUCP.
24 A predefined, standard composition of the team based on type of disaster and region could save the Commission valuable time before it sends out the initial request for nominations. 
24 Vnaprej določena, standardna sestava ekipe glede na vrsto nesreče in regijo bi lahko Komisiji prihranila dragocen čas, preden pošlje začetni zahtevek za imeno-vanje.
For the subsequent selection from among the nominated candidates, a clear checklist could accelerate the process, even during times of low capacity at the ERCC (e.g. night shifts, weekends). 
Jasen kontrolni seznam bi lahko pospešil postopek izbora med imenovanimi kandidati, ki sledi predložitvi zahtevka, tudi v obdobjih nizke zmogljivosti v Centru za usklajevanje nujnega odziva (npr. v nočnih izmenah in ob koncih tedna).
Such a process could in addition allow for shortlists of potential team members to be drawn up ahead of the final deadline for nominations. 
Takšen postopek bi lahko zajemal tudi uporabo ožjih seznamov možnih članov ekipe, ki bi se pripravili pred končnim rokom za predložitev imenovanj.
Observations 18 25 The performance of individual experts is not evaluated. 
Opažanja 18 25 Uspešnost posameznih strokovnjakov se ne ocenjuje.
While the evaluation of Participating States’ nominated experts can be a sensitive matter, adopting a structured approach to evaluating and documenting their performance could potentially save time during the selection procedure. 
Ocenjevanje strokovnjakov, ki jih imenujejo sodelujoče države, je lahko občutljivo vprašanje, vendar bi strukturiran pristop k ocenjevanju in dokumentiranju njihove uspešnosti lahko prihranil čas med postopkom izbora.
An example of such a process can be found in the EU-funded15 election observation missions (EOM), where peer-to-peer evaluations are routinely carried out for each observer sent by the Member States in order ‘to keep record of their professional performance and individual behaviour during any EU EOM in order to further facilitate and improve the selection process conducted by Member States and the EC’16. 
Primer takšnega postopka je mogoče najti pri misijah za opazovanje volitev (EOM), ki jih financira EU15 in pri katerih se vzajemna ocenjevanja izvajajo rutinsko za vsakega opazovalca, ki ga pošlje država članica, da se vodi evidenca o njegovi poklicni uspešnosti in obnašanju med vsako misijo EU za opazovanje volitev zaradi dodatnega olajševanja in izboljšanja postopka izbire, ki ga vodijo države članice in Evropska komisija16.
26 The Commission should support common needs assessments through the presence of EUCP experts, and/or provide advice on the assistance required in view of the needs17. When needs are expressed by the requester for assistance (affected state or UN body), the ERCC ensures that these are shared with all Participating States via CECIS. 
26 Komisija bi morala podpirati skupno ocenjevanje potreb s prisotnostjo strokovnjakov EUCP in/ali glede na potrebe svetovati v zvezi s potrebno pomočjo.17 Če potrebe izrazi prosilec za pomoč (prizadeta država ali telesa ZN), Center za usklajevanje nujnega odziva zagotovi, da so o njih prek sistema CECIS obveščene vse sodelujoče države.
There is also clear evidence to show that EUCP team members have participated in various assessment exercises on the ground. 
Obstajajo jasni dokazi, da so člani ekip EUCP sodelovali pri raznih ocenjevanjih na terenu.
Where EUCP team members are integrated into UN OCHA’s UNDAC teams, as was the case in Nepal, common assessments are typically produced through the UN. 
Kadar so člani ekip EUCP vključeni v skupine za oceno nesreč in koordinacijo (UNDAC) Urada ZN za usklajevanje humanitarnih dejavnosti (OCHA), kot so bili v primeru Nepala, se skupne ocene običajno pripravijo v okviru ZN.
An unintended consequence of this integration, however, is that it limits the possibility of identifying the EU’s individual contribution to these assessments (see also paragraphs 41 to 45). 
Nenadejana posledica tega vključevanja pa je, da je tako omejena možnost za ugotovitev, koliko k tem ocenam prispeva samo EU (glej tudi odstavke 41 do 45).
15 European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights. 
15 Evropski instrument za demokracijo in človekove pravice (EIDHR).
16 Guidelines for EU election observer evaluation (FPI4), p. 
16 Guidelines for EU Election Observer Evaluation (Smernice za ocenjevanje opazovalcev EU pri volitvah) (Služba za instrumente zunanje politike 4), str.
1, first paragraph. 
1, prvi odstavek.
17 Article 16(3)(a)(ii) and (v) and Article 16(3)(b). 
17 Člen 16(3)(a)(ii) in (v) ter člen 16(3)(b).
EU experts visit Kathmandu and the hospital after the earthquake © EU/ECHO/Pierre Prakash, 2015. Picture 2 
Obisk strokovnjakov EU v Katmanduju in v bolnišnici po potresu © EU/ECHO/Pierre Prakash, 2015.
Observations 19 27 Even where EU coordination was not fully integrated with UN coordination, as was the case in Bosnia and Herzegovina, we found only limited evidence of the causal link between needs assessments carried out on the ground by EUCP team members and the specific lists of needs being relayed to the Participating States. 
Opažanja 19 27 Tudi kadar usklajevanje EU ni bilo povsem vključeno v usklajevanje ZN, kot v primeru Bosne in Hercegovine, smo našli le malo dokazov o vzročni zvezi med ocenami potreb, ki so jih člani ekipe EUCP izvedli na terenu in specifičnimi seznami potreb, ki so bili posredovani sodelujočim državam.
The quality of reporting varied between EUCP teams but generally focused on information sharing and planned and completed activities. 
Kakovost poročanja je med ekipami EUCP nihala, vendar je bilo poročanje po navadi osredotočeno na deljenje informacij ter načrtovane in izvedene dejavnosti.
Daily reports lacked dedicated sections for the identification and concrete follow-up of needs. 
Dnevna poročila niso vsebovala posebnih rubrik za identifikacijo potreb in konkretne nadaljnje ukrepe v zvezi z njimi.
Although the voluntary pool was still of limited use at the time of the crises examined, the Commission played an active role in extending its scope The voluntary pool was of limited use at the time of the crises examined 28 The Commission’s duties towards the Participating States include making timely recommendations based on the needs on the ground and asking the Participating States to deploy specific resources18. If it is to make pertinent deployment recommendations, the Commission needs to be aware of the resources that are available for immediate deployment. 
Čeprav je bila uporabnost prostovoljnega nabora v času kriz, ki jih je preučilo Sodišče, omejena, je imela Komisija dejavno vlogo pri njegovi razširitvi Prostovoljni nabor je bil v času kriz, ki jih je preučilo Sodišče, le omejeno uporaben 28 Odgovornost Komisije do sodelujočih držav je, da izda pravočasna priporočila, pripravljena glede na potrebe na terenu, in jih pozove, naj napotijo specifične vire.18 Če želi Komisija izdati relevantna priporočila o napotitvi, mora poznati vire, ki so na voljo za takojšnjo napotitev.
29 At the time of the examined disasters, only a very limited number of assets had been registered in the voluntary pool. 
29 V času nesreč, ki jih je preučilo Sodišče, je bilo v prostovoljnem naboru registriranih le malo sredstev.
As a result, the Commission was generally not in a position to make deployment recommendations or ask Participating States to deploy capacities from the voluntary pool. 
Zato Komisija na splošno ni mogla izdati priporočil o napotitvi ali pozvati sodelujočih držav, naj napotijo zmogljivosti iz prostovoljnega nabora.
30 In October 2015, 1 year after the launch of the voluntary pool, still only a handful of modules had been registered in the pool. 
30 Oktobra 2015, tj. eno leto po vzpostavitvi prostovoljnega nabora, je bila v njem še vedno registrirana le peščica modulov.
According to the Participating States questioned, the main reason for the slow development of the pool was the heavy administrative burden involved in registering and certifying response units/mod-ules, which in some cases may also entail additional administrative arrangements at the national level. 
Po mnenju sodelujočih držav, ki so odgovorile na vprašalnik, je glavni razlog za počasen napredek nabora veliko upravno breme v zvezi z registracijo in certifikacijo enot/modulov za odziv, ki lahko v nekaterih primerih pomeni dodatne upravne ureditve na nacionalni ravni.
18 Article 16(3)(b) of the Decision. 
18 Člen 16(3) Sklepa.
Observations 20 The Commission played an active role in extending the capacities of the voluntary pool 31 The need for a medical evacuation service for medical staff and humanitarian aid workers in the field was highlighted by several actors as the Ebola outbreak developed. 
Opažanja 20 Komisija je imela aktivno vlogo pri širitvi zmogljivosti prostovoljnega nabora 31 Potrebo po službi za medicinsko evakuacijo zdravstvenega osebja in humanitarnih delavcev na terenu je poudarilo več akterjev med dogodki, povezanimi z izbruhom ebole.
The legal framework19 provided only for a more general service for ‘medical aerial evacuation of disaster victims’20; it did not anticipate a service specifically adapted to evacuate (potentially) infected medical staff or humanitarian aid workers. 
V pravnem okviru19 je določena le splošna storitev za medicinsko evakuacijo žrtev nesreč po zraku20, ne predvideva pa posebej prilagojene storitve za evakuacijo (morebiti) okuženega medicinskega osebja in humanitarnih delavcev.
The Commission nevertheless took an active role, pushing for a flexible approach and further capacities to be included in the voluntary pool. 
Komisija je kljub temu prevzela dejavno vlogo in se je zavzemala za prožen pristop in dodatne zmogljivosti, ki bi se vključile v prostovoljni nabor.
While the WHO was the only party authorised to request medical evacuations (or ‘medevac’), the ERCC played an important role, acting as a clearing house, answering any questions coming from the stakeholders at the various stages of the medevac process (WHO, Participating States, UN agencies, NGOs, etc.), and deploying the planes from the voluntary pool. 
Čeprav je bila SZO edini subjekt, ki je lahko zahteval medicinske evakuacije (me-devac), je Center za usklajevanje nujnega odziva igral pomembno vlogo, saj je deloval kot posrednik, odgovarjal na morebitna vprašanja deležnikov v različnih fazah procesa medicinskih evakuacij (SZO, sodelujoče države, agencije ZN, NVO itd.) in skrbel za napotitve letal iz prostovoljnega nabora.
The coordination and collaboration needed to develop these capacities are described further in paragraph 66. 
Usklajevanje in sodelovanje, potrebna za razvoj teh zmogljivosti, sta podrobneje opisana v odstavku 66.
32 As a direct response to the lack of medical staff during the Ebola outbreak, the Commission established the EU Medical Corps as a new component within the voluntary pool to mobilise medical and public health experts and teams for preparedness or response operations inside or outside the EU21. 33 The ECDC made an important contribution to the EU’s response to the Ebola outbreak through its ‘rapid risk assessments’ and coordinating the deployment of the ECDC’s and Member States’ epidemiological experts to the affected region (although these mostly happened after the peak of cases, as shown in Annex IV). 
32 Kot neposreden odziv na pomanjkanje zdravstvenega osebja med izbruhom ebole je Komisija vzpostavila zdravstvene sile EU, ki so nov element v prostovoljnem naboru, namenjen mobilizaciji strokovnjakov s področja medicine in javnega zdravja ter skupin za dejavnosti pripravljenosti ali odzivanja v EU ali zunaj nje.21 33 Evropski center za preprečevanje in obvladovanje bolezni (ECDC) je pomembno prispeval k odzivu EU na izbruh ebole s svojimi hitrimi ocenami tveganja in usklajevanjem napotitve epidemioloških strokovnjakov ECDC in držav članic v prizadeto regijo (čeprav so te potekale večinoma po obdobju, ko je bilo primerov največ, kot je prikazano v Prilogi IV).