natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Moreover, Article 11(2) of Regulation 883/2013 is not per se a sufficient legal basis to allow all Member States' judicial authorities to use OLAF reports as evidence in trial. 
883/2013 sam po sebi ni zadostna pravna podlaga, da bi pravosodnim organom vseh držav članic omogočal uporabo poročil urada OLAF kot dokazov v sodnih postopkih.
Therefore, in some Member States, after receiving the OLAF final report, prosecutors start investigation activities once again in order to acquire admissible evidence. 
Zato v nekaterih državah članicah tožilci po prejemu končnega poročila urada OLAF še enkrat začnejo preiskovalne dejavnosti, da pridobijo dopustne dokaze.
In these cases, the insufficient evidence that justifies the dismissal is not the evidence collected by OLAF, but the evidence collected by national investigators (see also Commission's reply to paragraph 102). 
V teh primerih nezadostni dokazi, ki upravičujejo zavrnitev, niso dokazi, ki jih je zbral urad OLAF, temveč dokazi, ki so jih zbrali nacionalni preiskovalci (glej tudi odgovor Komisije na odstavek 102).
Conversely, it appears that sometimes prosecutors expect the OLAF final report to be a ready-to-use product, which does not require any further investigation activity or, when prosecutors cannot use evidence collected by OLAF, just requires repeating investigation activities already carried out by OLAF investigators. 
Nasprotno se zdi, da tožilci včasih pričakujejo, da bo končno poročilo urada OLAF mogoče uporabiti takoj, ne da bi bila potrebna kakršna koli nadaljnja preiskovalna dejavnost, ali da bo treba, kadar tožilci ne morejo uporabiti dokazov, ki jih je zbral urad OLAF, le ponoviti preiskovalne dejavnosti, ki so jih izvedli že preiskovalci urada OLAF.
Then, if evidence is not already available in full in the OLAF final report, the case may be dismissed because evidence is deemed insufficient. 
Če v takem primeru dokazi niso v celoti na voljo že v končnem poročilu urada OLAF, se lahko primer zavrne, ker se dokazi štejejo za nezadostne.
There are also cases where dismissals appear to be motivated by limited knowledge of the rules governing EU funding and notably the obligation of the beneficiary to provide accurate information. 
Obstajajo tudi primeri, v katerih se zdi, da je razlog za zavrnitev omejeno poznavanje pravil, s katerimi je urejeno financiranje EU, zlasti obveznosti upravičenca, da zagotovi točne informacije.
Dismissals by national authorities might also take place in politically sensitive cases. 
Nacionalni organi lahko zavrnejo tudi politično občutljive primere.
Nonetheless, OLAF continuously works on improving the quality of final reports and the follow-up to its recommendations. 
Kljub vsemu si urad OLAF nenehno prizadeva za izboljšanje kakovosti končnih poročil in nadaljnjega ukrepanja na podlagi svojih priporočil.
A number of projects are already under preparation, such as new templates for the final reports. 
V pripravi je že več novih projektov, kot so predloge za končna poročila. 19
The period that has elapsed since the alleged offence was committed is not only linked to the duration of OLAF's investigations, which has decreased continuously over the past years, but also to the detection of the fraud, the timing when it was communicated to OLAF and the time when the national prosecutor finally acted on OLAF’s recommendation. 19 
Čas, ki je pretekel od storitve domnevnega kaznivega dejanja, ni povezan samo s trajanjem preiskav urada OLAF, ki se v zadnjih letih nenehno skrajšuje, ampak tudi z odkritjem goljufije, časom, v katerem je bila ta sporočena uradu OLAF, in trenutkom, ko je nacionalni tožilec končno ukrepal na podlagi priporočila urada OLAF.
The Commission notes that the analysis concerning the follow-up of OLAF’s investigations is based on a relatively small number of interviews with Commission services and Member States' judicial authorities. 
Komisija opozarja, da analiza v zvezi z nadaljnjim ukrepanjem na podlagi preiskav urada OLAF temelji na razmeroma majhnem številu razgovorov s službami Komisije in pravosodnimi organi držav članic.
See also Commission's reply to paragraph 99. 
Glej tudi odgovor Komisije na odstavek 99.
The Commission’s 2017 evaluation of the OLAF Regulation has identified as the main factor hindering the follow-up to judicial recommendations the fact that the Regulation does not sufficiently ensure the use of OLAF reports as evidence in trial in the Member States. 
V oceni uredbe o uradu OLAF, ki jo je Komisije izvedla leta 2017, je bilo kot glavni dejavnik, ki preprečuje nadaljnje ukrepanje na podlagi sodnih priporočil, opredeljeno dejstvo, da z navedeno uredbo ni zadostno zagotovljena uporaba poročil urada OLAF kot dokazov v sodnih postopkih v državah članicah.
In some Member States, after receiving the OLAF final report, prosecutors carry out all the investigation activities once again in order to acquire admissible evidence. 
V nekaterih državah članicah tožilci po prejemu končnega poročila urada OLAF še enkrat izvedejo vse preiskovalne dejavnosti, da pridobijo dopustne dokaze.
This raises efficiency issues, and may lead to offences becoming time-barred. 
To sproža vprašanja učinkovitosti in lahko vodi do zastaranja kaznivih dejanj.
The question of admissibility has been addressed in the Commission's proposal to amend Regulation 883/2013. 
Vprašanje dopustnosti je bilo obravnavano v predlogu Komisije za spremembo Uredbe št. 883/2013.
It should be taken into account that not all Member States apply the legality principle: in those where the launch of a case is a discretionary decision of the judicial authority, an OLAF final report can be the decisive argument in favour of opening a judicial investigation. 
Upoštevati je treba, da načela zakonitosti ne uporabljajo vse države članice: v tistih državah članicah, kjer o začetku zadeve po lastni presoji odloči pravosodni organ, je lahko končno poročilo urada OLAF odločilni argument za začetek sodne preiskave.
The Commission notes that the average duration of closed and ongoing investigations was 15.8 months and that the average duration of the selection corresponding to these cases was 1.8 months.10 OLAF opens investigations following the analysis of information of potential investigative interest received by OLAF from external sources. 
Komisija opozarja, da so končane preiskave in preiskave v teku v povprečju trajale 15,8 meseca ter da je izbiranje teh zadev v povprečju trajalo 1,8 meseca10. Urad OLAF začne preiskave na podlagi analize informacij, zanimivih za preiskavo, ki jih prejme od zunanjih virov.
This is done without undue delay. 
To stori brez nepotrebnega odlašanja.
It is also OLAF's normal practice to open cases following information retrieved in the framework of its own investigative activities to promptly tackle irregular conduct. 
Običajna praksa urada OLAF je tudi, da zadeve začne na podlagi informacij, ki jih pridobi v okviru lastnih preiskovalnih dejavnosti, da se nezakonito ravnanje nemudoma odpravi.
The creation of the EPPO will help rectify certain shortcomings of the current system of investigations and prosecutions of offences against the financial interests of the EU. 
Ustanovitev EJT bo pomagala odpraviti nekatere pomanjkljivosti sedanjega sistema preiskav in pregona kaznivih dejanj, ki škodijo finančnim interesom EU.
OLAF, as all EU IBOAs and Member States' competent authorities, will have to report to EPPO without undue delay any suspicion of possible criminal offence falling within the EPPO's investigative competence. 
Urad OLAF bo moral tako kot vse institucije, uradi, organi in agencije EU ter pristojni organi držav članic EJT brez nepotrebnega odlašanja poročati o vseh sumih morebitnih kaznivih dejanj, ki spadajo v preiskovalno pristojnost EJT.
The EPPO will thus be able to directly start criminal investigations and prosecutions of cases of suspected fraud, and bring those cases to court. 
EJT bo tako lahko neposredno začelo kazenske preiskave in pregon v primerih sumov goljufij ter te primere predložilo sodišču.Komisija je sprejela predlog za spremembo Uredbe št.
The Commission has adopted its proposal for the amendment of Regulation 883/2013, which will adapt the functioning of OLAF to the establishment of the EPPO, to ensure close cooperation based on the complementarity of their respective mandates. 
883/2013, s katero se bo delovanje urada OLAF prilagodilo ustanovitvi EJT, da se bo zagotovilo tesno sodelovanje, ki bo temeljilo na dopolnjevanju njunih mandatov.
Pending the setting-up of the EPPO, OLAF ensures the mutual exchange of information with the competent national authorities under Article 12 of Regulation 883/2013 by transmitting in due time to the competent national authorities any relevant information obtained in the course of external investigations. 
Do ustanovitve EJT urad OLAF zagotavlja medsebojno izmenjavo informacij s pristojnimi nacionalnimi organi na podlagi člena 12 Uredbe št. 883/2013, tako da pristojnim nacionalnim organom pravočasno pošlje vse pomembne informacije, pridobljene med zunanjimi preiskavami.
It should furthermore be noted that the average duration of closed and ongoing OLAF investigations has significantly decreased compared to past years (from 22.4 months in 2011 to 15.8 months in 2017). 
Poleg tega je treba navesti, da se je povprečno trajanje končanih preiskav urada OLAF in njegovih preiskav, ki so v teku, v primerjavi s prejšnjimi leti bistveno skrajšalo (z 22,4 meseca v letu 2011 na 15,8 meseca v letu 2017).
Common reply to paragraphs 106-108: 10 See 2017 OLAF Report. 20 
Skupni odgovor na odstavke 106–108: 10 Glej poročilo urada OLAF za leto 2017. 20
As stated by the ECA, recovery usually takes several years, and therefore comparing amounts recommended and recovered during the same period does not provide an accurate measurement and underestimates the amount of recoveries. 
Kot je navedlo Evropsko računsko sodišče, je za izterjavo navadno potrebnih več let, zato primerjava med priporočenimi in izterjanimi zneski v istem obdobju ne omogoča natančne meritve, saj so zneski izterjav ocenjeni prenizko.
Under shared management, it is the responsibility of the Member States to recover the unduly spent amounts from the beneficiaries. 
V okviru deljenega upravljanja so za izterjavo neupravičeno porabljenih zneskov od upravičencev odgovorne države članice.
In addition, the financial impact of the precautionary measures recommended by OLAF and the amounts thus prevented from being unduly spent have not been included in the scope of the audit and have therefore not been analysed. 
Poleg tega v obseg revizije niso bili vključeni finančni učinek varnostnih ukrepov, ki jih je priporočil urad OLAF, in zneski, katerih neupravičena poraba je bila s tem preprečena, ter tako niso bili analizirani.
The Commission notes that the actual recoveries following the investigations by OLAF exceed by far the costs of OLAF. 
Komisija opozarja, da dejanske izterjave na podlagi preiskav urada OLAF daleč presegajo stroške tega urada.
OLAF has continuously worked on improving the quality of its final reports and recommendations. 
Urad OLAF si stalno prizadeva izboljšati kakovost svojih končnih poročil in priporočil.
Notably, in October 2016 OLAF issued new instructions to investigators to ensure the clarity of information provided by OLAF with respect to estimated amounts to be recovered. 
Oktobra 2016 je zlasti izdal nova navodila za preiskovalce, da bi se zagotovila jasnost informacij urada OLAF v zvezi z ocenjenimi zneski za izterjavo.
See also Commission's reply to paragraph 115. 
Glej tudi odgovor Komisije na odstavek 115.
The ECA’s findings in paragraph 110 highlight the fact that there is sometimes a question of timing to be considered when a double objective needs to be pursued, namely that of recovery of unduly paid sums and of not jeopardising the criminal investigation at national level. 
Ugotovitve Evropskega računskega sodišča v odstavku 110 kažejo, da gre včasih za vprašanje izbire pravega trenutka pri izpolnjevanju dvojnega cilja, tj. da se izterjajo neupravičeno izplačani zneski in da se ne ogrozi kazenska preiskava na nacionalni ravni.
This is why recovery procedures are at times put on hold. 
To je razlog, da se postopki izterjave včasih zamrznejo.
This situation is, however, relatively rare and concerns cases where there is a national pre-trial procedure ongoing and the national judicial authorities have expressly requested OLAF to ensure strictest confidentiality for a certain period of time (normally until the performance or finalisation of certain activities). 
Vendar so take razmere razmeroma redke, nanašajo pa se na primere, v katerih je v teku nacionalni predhodni postopek in so nacionalni pravosodni organi urad OLAF izrecno zaprosili, naj za določeno obdobje zagotovi najstrožjo zaupnost (navadno, dokler niso opravljene ali dokončane določene dejavnosti).
The periods during which recovery procedures are put on hold are generally short. 
Obdobja, v katerih se postopki izterjave zamrznejo, so po navadi kratka.
In most of the cases, however, the financial recovery procedure is conducted in parallel, independently from the judicial procedure, according to the rules on recovery following administrative irregularities. 
Vendar se v večini primerov postopek finančne izterjave vodi vzporedno, neodvisno od sodnega postopka, v skladu s pravili o izterjavi na podlagi upravnih nepravilnosti.
The issue is addressed in the “OLAF Guidelines on the use of OLAF Final Reports by Commission Services for recovery procedures and other measures in the direct expenditure and external aid sector”, which states that administrative and/or financial penalties may be taken without prejudice to any action taken at national level and that the Authorising Officer by Delegation (AOD) should not await the outcome of criminal proceedings (if any) before taking administrative or recovery action, unless specifically asked to do so by OLAF. 
Vprašanje je obravnavano v „Smernicah urada OLAF za uporabo končnih poročil urada OLAF s strani služb Komisije v postopkih izterjave in drugih ukrepih na področjih neposrednih izdatkov in zunanje pomoči“, v katerih je navedeno, da se lahko upravne in/ali finančne kazni sprejmejo brez poseganja v kateri koli ukrep, sprejet na nacionalni ravni, ter da odredbodajalec na podlagi prenosa pooblastil ne bi smel čakati na izid (morebitnega) kazenskega postopka, preden sprejme upravni ukrep ali ukrep izterjave, razen če ga urad OLAF za to izrecno ne zaprosi.
The Commission is of the opinion that by applying financial corrections in the area of shared management, including when recommended by OLAF, and by ensuring that the corresponding amounts are withdrawn from the programme expenditure, the EU budget is protected. 
Komisija meni, da je z uporabo finančnih popravkov na področju deljenega upravljanja, tudi na priporočilo urada OLAF, in z zagotavljanjem, da so ustrezni zneski umaknjeni iz izdatkov programa, proračun EU zaščiten.
When a shared management Directorate-General, e.g. DG REGIO, receives a final case report from OLAF, it sends a financial follow-up letter to the Member State to request the recovery of EU funds in line with the OLAF final report. 
Ko generalni direktorat, ki spada v okvir deljenega upravljanja, npr. GD za regionalno in mestno politiko, od urada OLAF prejme končno poročilo o primeru, državi članici pošlje dopis o nadaljnjem finančnem ukrepanju, s katerim zahteva izterjavo sredstev EU v skladu s končnim poročilom urada OLAF.
The Member State is requested to provide its observations. 
Država članica je zaprošena, da predloži pripombe.
In case the Member State disagrees with OLAF’s assessment and recommendation, DG REGIO assesses the Member State's reply against all applicable rules and takes a final position. 
Če se država članica ne strinja z oceno in priporočilom urada OLAF, GD za regionalno in mestno politiko oceni odgovor države članice glede na vsa veljavna pravila ter sprejme končno stališče.
The AOD may decide to follow the conclusions of the OLAF final report and implement the recommendation as set out in the report, including by proposing the Commission to adopt a financial correction decision of the appropriate amount, taking into account applicable law. 
Odredbodajalec na podlagi prenosa pooblastil se lahko odloči, da bo upošteval ugotovitve iz končnega poročila urada OLAF in izvedel priporočilo, navedeno v poročilu, med drugim tako, da bo Komisiji predlagal, naj v zvezi z ustreznim zneskom sprejme sklep o finančnem popravku, ob upoštevanju prava, ki se uporablja.
In case the Member State agrees with the OLAF financial recommendation, it is then for the national authorities to recover the funds from the respective beneficiaries. 
Če se država članica strinja s finančnim priporočilom urada OLAF, je nato naloga nacionalnih organov, da izterjajo sredstva od zadevnih upravičencev.
Under the Common Provisions Regulation (EU) 1303/2013, Member States are obliged to recover amounts unduly paid following an irregularity. 
V skladu z uredbo o skupnih določbah (EU) št.1303/2013 morajo države članice po ugotovitvi nepravilnosti izterjati neupravičeno izplačane zneske.
While the Commission has no obligation to check the amounts recovered from each beneficiary, the system audits include verification of the accuracy of expenditure of 21 
Čeprav Komisiji ni treba preveriti zneskov, izterjanih od vsakega upravičenca, revizije sistema vključujejo preverjanje izdatkov umaknjenih in izterjanih zneskov, zajetih v 21
amounts withdrawn and amounts recovered recorded in the certifying authorities’ accounting system. 
računovodskem sistemu organov za potrjevanje.
In addition, Member States have a strong incentive to detect and correct fraud and irregular expenditure, since they may replace irregular amounts which are detected after the submission of the accounts by making the corresponding adjustments in the accounts for the accounting year in which the irregularity is detected. 
Poleg tega so države članice močno spodbujene k odkrivanju in odpravljanju goljufij in nepravilnih izdatkov, saj lahko nadomestijo nepravilne zneske, odkrite po predložitvi računovodskih izkazov, tako da izvedejo ustrezne prilagoditve v računovodskih izkazih za obračunsko leto, v katerem je nepravilnost odkrita.
In shared management, it is the Member States’ responsibility to determine an amount to be recovered in line with EU legislation and national legislation where applicable. 
Pri deljenem upravljanju so za določitev zneska, ki ga je treba izterjati v skladu z zakonodajo EU in po potrebi z nacionalno zakonodajo, odgovorne države članice.
DG AGRI monitors in a systemic way whether Member States manage the recovery of debts properly and, if necessary, follows up in the context of the conformity clearance procedure. 
GD za kmetijstvo in razvoj podeželja sistemsko spremlja, ali države članice ustrezno vodijo izterjavo dolgov, in po potrebi nadalje ukrepa v okviru postopka potrditve skladnosti.
The EU budget is protected by the application of the so called 50/50 rule. 
Proračun EU je zaščiten z uporabo tako imenovanega pravila 50/50.
It provides that when debts are not recovered within a specified time limit, half of the relevant amount, including interests, is re-credited to the EU budget. 
To pravilo določa, da kadar se dolgovi ne izterjajo v določenem roku, se polovica zadevnega zneska, vključno z obrestmi, ponovno knjiži v dobro proračuna EU.
Moreover, in case the debt was not recovered due to negligence of the Member State, the total amount of the debt is re-credited to the EU budget. 
Poleg tega se v primeru, da zaradi malomarnosti države članice dolg ni bil izterjan, celotni znesek dolga ponovno knjiži v dobro proračuna EU.
As the ECA itself states in paragraph 107, recovery is a lengthy procedure, taking an average of 36 months, which means that it can take even longer in individual cases. 
Kot Evropsko računsko sodišče samo navaja v odstavku 107, je izterjava dolgotrajen postopek, ki v povprečju traja 36 mesecev, kar pomeni, da lahko v posameznih primerih traja tudi dlje.
For example, one such recommendation issued in the period 2012-2014, and in which a final decision has yet to be taken, accounts for 20% of the overall amount recommended to DGs REGIO, EMPL and AGRI in that time frame. 
V enem primeru tako priporočilo, ki je bilo izdano v obdobju 2012–2014 in v zvezi s katerim končna odločitev še ni bila sprejeta, predstavlja 20 % skupnega zneska, ki je bil GD za regionalno in mestno politiko, GD za zaposlovanje, socialne zadeve in vključevanje ter GD kmetijstvo in razvoj podeželja priporočen v navedenem časovnem okviru.
Therefore, the rate of recovery can be expected to increase over time. 
Zato se lahko pričakuje, da se bo stopnja izterjave sčasoma povečala.
The Commission notes that the ECA’s analysis does not include the amounts prevented from being unduly spent from the EU budget as decided by the Commission following OLAF's recommendations. 
Komisija opozarja, da analiza Evropskega računskega sodišča ne vključuje zneskov, katerih neupravičena poraba iz proračuna EU je bila preprečena, kot je Komisija odločila na podlagi priporočil urada OLAF.
These amounts alone total EUR 160 million with regard to recommendations issued between 2012 and 2014 and would, for the sake of comparison, be equal to 16% of the overall amount recommended for recovery to the three Directorates-General in that time frame. 
Samo ti zneski skupaj znašajo 160 milijonov EUR v zvezi s priporočili, izdanimi med letoma 2012 in 2014, ter bi za primerjavo znašali 16 % celotnega zneska, za izterjavo v navedenem časovnem okviru priporočenega vsem trem generalnim direktoratom.
The Commission underlines that EU money has been recovered or withdrawn, where possible, in order to safeguard the EU budget. 
Komisija poudarja, da so bila sredstva EU izterjana ali umaknjena, če je bilo mogoče, zato da se je zaščitil proračun EU.
See also reply to paragraphs 106-108. 
Glej tudi odgovor na odstavke 106–108.
The final decision on the amounts to be recovered falls under the scope of activity of the Authorising Officer by Delegation. 
Končna odločitev o zneskih, ki jih je treba izterjati, spada v okvir dejavnosti odredbodajalca na podlagi prenosa pooblastil.
The main reason for not recovering the amounts as recommended by OLAF has been the lack of legal base to apply a financial correction. 
Glavni razlog za to, da niso bili izterjani zneski, ki jih je priporočil urad OLAF, je bilo pomanjkanje pravne podlage za uporabo finančnega popravka.
The instructions to OLAF staff on drafting and calculating financial recommendations dated October 2016 provide, inter alia, for a detailed outline on how to determine the relevant amounts (estimated impact of the facts established, estimated amounts to be recovered and the estimated amounts to be prevented from being unduly spent) as well as the information provided in the recommendation document and final report supporting these amounts. 
Navodila osebju urada OLAF za pripravo in izračun finančnih priporočil iz oktobra 2016 med drugim vsebujejo podroben opis, kako določiti ustrezne zneske (ocenjeni vpliv ugotovljenih dejstev, ocenjeni zneski, ki jih je treba izterjati, in ocenjeni zneski, v zvezi s katerimi je treba preprečiti neupravičeno porabo), ter informacije, navedene v dokumentu s priporočili in končnem poročilu, na katerih ti zneski temeljijo.
These instructions were followed up in July 2017 by OLAF with the adoption of “Guidelines on Financial Monitoring” which refocuses and simplifies the monitoring of financial recommendations. 
Urad OLAF je na podlagi teh navodil julija 2017 sprejel „Smernice o finančnem spremljanju“, s katerimi se znova daje poudarek spremljanju finančnih priporočil in to spremljanje poenostavlja.
As the new instructions and revised guidelines are relatively recent, their full impact has yet to been seen in the system. 
Ker so nova navodila in revidirane smernice razmeroma novi, bo treba na njihov polni učinek v sistemu še počakati.
See also Commission's reply to paragraph 114. 
Glej tudi odgovor Komisije na odstavek 114.