natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Commission would furthermore like to emphasise that it focuses its limited financial and human resources on areas where it can make the biggest difference, ensuring the highest level of cost-effectiveness, and respecting the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity. 
Komisija želi poleg tega poudariti, da svoje omejene finančne in človeške vire osredotoča na področja, na katerih lahko doseže največje spremembe, pri čemer zagotavlja najvišjo raven stroškovne učinkovitosti ter spoštuje načeli sorazmernosti in subsidiarnosti.
This means that it has deliberately chosen not to perform some of the activities that the ECA is suggesting it should perform in the present Special Report. 
To pomeni, da se je namerno odločila, da ne bo izvedla nekaterih dejavnosti, katerih izvedbo ji Evropsko računsko sodišče predlaga v tem posebnem poročilu.
The Commission is currently considering the resource implications of the recommendations of the ECA in the context of the ongoing revision of the CAFS. 
Komisija trenutno preučuje posledice, ki bi jih priporočila Evropskega računskega sodišča imela za vire v okviru revizije strategije Komisije za boj proti goljufijam, ki je v teku.
V. The specific issues raised by the ECA regarding the Commission's anti-fraud policy cannot be seen in isolation from the important developments listed below:  Revision of the Staff Regulations for officials and other servants of the European Union in 2013;  Updated integrated control framework and peer review of fraud risk in 2017;Directive (EU) 2017/1371 on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law (PIF Directive);  Regulation 2017/1939 setting up the EPPO;  Proposal of 2018 to amend the OLAF Regulation 883/2013;  New Financial Regulation 2018/1046;  Initiative for a revision of the Financial Framework Regulation on decentralised agencies;  Proposals for post-2020 spending programmes; 1 
V. Posebnih vprašanj, na katera je Evropsko računsko sodišče opozorilo v zvezi s politiko Komisije na področju boja proti goljufijam, ni mogoče obravnavati ločeno od pomembnega razvoja dogodkov, navedenega v nadaljevanju:  revizije kadrovskih predpisov za uradnike in druge uslužbence Evropske unije v letu 2013;  posodobljenega integriranega okvira kontrole in medsebojnega strokovnega pregleda tveganja goljufij v letu 2017; Direktive (EU) 2017/1371 o boju proti goljufijam, ki škodijo finančnim interesom Unije, z uporabo kazenskega prava (v nadaljnjem besedilu: direktiva o zaščiti finančnih interesov);  Uredbe 2017/1939 o ustanovitvi EJT;  predloga iz leta 2018 za spremembo uredbe o uradu OLAF št. 883/2013;  nove finančne uredbe 2018/1046;  pobude za revizijo uredbe o finančnem okviru v zvezi z decentraliziranimi agencijami; 1
 Ongoing update of the Commission’s Anti-Fraud Strategy (CAFS). It should be noted that the recommendations of the EDES Panel go much beyond cases of fraud or corruption: they encompass also, inter alia grave professional misconduct, serious breach of contractual obligations, irregularities in the meaning of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95. 
Opozoriti je treba, da priporočila odbora sistema za zgodnje odkrivanje in izključitev precej presegajo primere goljufij in korupcije: med drugim zajemajo tudi hude kršitve poklicnih pravil, resne kršitve pogodbenih obveznosti in nepravilnosti v smislu Uredbe Sveta (ES, Euratom) št.
There is no cost-effective method to estimate undetected fraud reliable and defendable enough for evidence-based policy. 
Ne obstaja nobena stroškovno učinkovita metoda za oceno neodkritih goljufij, ki bi bila dovolj zanesljiva in utemeljena za z dokazi podprto politiko.
The methods mentioned by the ECA would not be well-suited in this specific context (see Commission's replies to paragraphs 14–16, 33–37). 
Metode, ki jih navaja Evropsko računsko sodišče, v teh konkretnih okoliščinah ne bi bile primerne (glej odgovore Komisije na odstavke 14– 16 in 33–37).
In its annual PIF Report, the Commission provides statistics on suspected and detected fraud based on the reporting of the Member States. 
Komisija v svojem letnem poročilu o zaščiti finančnih interesov navaja statistične podatke o sumih goljufij in odkritih goljufijah, kot so jih prijavile države članice.
The current reporting system represents a good practice in the field of data collection on fraud and is continuously improving. 
Sedanji sistem prijavljanja pomeni dobro prakso na področju zbiranja podatkov o goljufijah in se nenehno izboljšuje.
Its limits are overstated in the present Special Report (see Commission's replies to paragraphs 23-31). 
Njegove omejitve, navedene v tem posebnem poročilu, so pretirane (glej odgovore Komisije na odstavke 23–31).
The Commission considers that an analysis of what causes some recipients of EU money to behave fraudulently would not be the best use of its limited resources. 
Po mnenju Komisije analiza vzrokov za to, da nekateri prejemniki sredstev EU ravnajo goljufivo, ne bi pomenila najboljše uporabe njenih omejenih virov.
The Commission gears the analysis of fraud towards the areas and tools that provide maximum effectiveness and efficiency (see Commission's replies to paragraphs 14–16, 29, 33–37, 47). 
Komisija osredotoča analizo goljufij na področja in orodja, ki zagotavljajo največjo učinkovitost in uspešnost (glej odgovore Komisije na odstavke 14–16, 29, 33–37 in 47).
With regard to the overall impact of OLAF’s investigations, it is important to note that the precautionary measures issued by OLAF (see Article 7 of Regulation 883/2013) and the overall deterrent effect of OLAF’s actions are also important elements which need to be assessed. 
Kar zadeva splošni vpliv preiskav urada OLAF, je treba navesti, da so tudi varnostni ukrepi, ki jih izda ta urad (glej člen 7 Uredbe št. 883/2013), in splošni odvračilni učinek njegovega ukrepanja pomembni elementi, ki jih je treba oceniti.
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. 
Analiza nadaljnjega ukrepanja na podlagi preiskav urada OLAF temelji na razmeroma majhnem številu razgovorov s službami Komisije in pravosodnimi organi držav članic.
Moreover, the analysis of the role and responsibilities of other actors in the current system, in particular other EU institutions and Member States, to detect and investigate irregularities and to take appropriate follow-up measures, is limited. 
Poleg tega je analiza vloge in odgovornosti drugih akterjev v sedanjem sistemu, zlasti drugih institucij EU in držav članic, za odkrivanje in preiskovanje nepravilnosti ter sprejemanje ustreznih nadaljnjih ukrepov omejena.
Analysing the anti-fraud action of the Commission and of OLAF requires a comprehensive approach. 
Analiziranje ukrepov Komisije in urada OLAF za boj proti goljufijam zahteva celovit pristop.
As regards the indictment rate, the efficiency of OLAF's investigations cannot be measured by this single criterion, as indictment is only one of the many outcomes of OLAF investigations. 
Kar zadeva stopnjo vložitve obtožnic, učinkovitosti preiskav urada OLAF ni mogoče meriti samo na podlagi tega merila, saj je obtožnica samo eden od številnih rezultatov preiskav urada OLAF.
It is frequent good practice that OLAF and national judicial authorities work in parallel and coordinate their operational activities. 
Pogosto se šteje za dobro prakso, da urad OLAF in nacionalni pravosodni organi delujejo vzporedno ter usklajujejo svoje operativne dejavnosti.
OLAF has in recent years improved its cooperation with the judicial authorities on the follow-up to its recommendations. 
Urad OLAF je v zadnjih letih izboljšal svoje sodelovanje s pravosodnimi organi pri nadaljnjem ukrepanju na podlagi njegovih priporočil.
The difficulties regarding the follow-up given by national authorities to OLAF’s judicial recommendations are a long-standing challenge, well-known to OLAF, the Commission and the Member States. 
Težave v zvezi z nadaljnjim ukrepanjem nacionalnih organov na podlagi sodnih priporočil urada OLAF že dolgo pomenijo izziv, ki je uradu OLAF, Komisiji in državam članicam dobro poznan.
To address this challenge, the Commission has proposed the creation of the EPPO. 
Komisija je za obravnavo tega izziva predlagala ustanovitev EJT.
Also, the recent Commission proposal to amend Regulation 883/2013 aims to improve the follow-up to OLAF's judicial recommendations, notably by clarifying the admissibility of the results of OLAF's investigations in judicial proceedings in Member States. 
Tudi njen nedavni predlog za spremembo Uredbe št. 883/2013 je namenjen izboljšanju nadaljnjega ukrepanja na podlagi sodnih priporočil urada OLAF, zlasti z razjasnitvijo dopustnosti rezultatov preiskav urada OLAF v sodnih postopkih v državah članicah.
With regard to recovery, OLAF has taken action to clarify the information provided in its final reports and the content of the recommendations in relation to estimated amounts to be recovered. 
Kar zadeva izterjavo, je urad OLAF sprejel ukrepe, da bi pojasnil informacije iz svojih končnih poročil in vsebino priporočil v zvezi z ocenjenimi zneski za izterjavo.
OLAF issued "Instructions on drafting Financial Recommendations and related sections of the Final Report" in October 2016 which should make OLAF recommendations easier to implement. 
Oktobra 2016 je izdal „Navodila za pripravo finančnih priporočil in povezanih oddelkov končnega poročila“, ki naj bi olajšala izvajanje priporočil urada OLAF.
The effect of these instructions on financial recommendations will only be fully visible in the future. 
Učinek teh navodil na finančna priporočila bo v celoti viden šele v prihodnje.
Furthermore, in July 2017 OLAF issued new "Guidelines on Financial Monitoring" designed inter alia to shorten the period for the spending Directorates-General to calculate the amounts to be recovered. 
2 7
The EPPO Regulation, adopted under enhanced cooperation1, introduces a significant institutional innovation which will considerably step up the protection of the EU budget against fraud and will also change the landscape of justice in Europe. 
Z uredbo o EJT, sprejeto v okviru okrepljenega sodelovanja,1 se uvaja pomembna institucionalna novost, s katero se bo bistveno okrepila zaščita proračuna EU pred goljufijami, spremenilo pa se bo tudi pravosodno okolje v Evropi.
It will operate as a single body across all participating Member States. 
Delovala bo kot enotni organ v vseh sodelujočih državah članicah.
The EPPO will be directly responsible for the investigations, prosecutions and bringing to judgement of crimes affecting the financial interests of the Union, hand in hand with national authorities, which will be under an obligation to abide by instructions given by the European Delegated Prosecutors. 
EJT bo neposredno odgovorno za preiskavo, pregon in obtožbo kaznivih dejanj, ki vplivajo na finančne interese Unije, z roko v roki z nacionalnimi organi, ki bodo morali upoštevati navodila evropskih delegiranih tožilcev.
Member States are also responsible to allocate sufficient resources and have signalled their willingness to do so. 
Države članice so odgovorne tudi za dodelitev zadostnih virov in so izrazile pripravljenost, da to storijo.
The Commission and Member States are working intensively to ensure that the EPPO can start operations at the end of 2020. 
Komisija in države članice si močno prizadevajo, da bi lahko EJT začelo delovati konec leta 2020.
Fighting fraud against the EU budget is a joint task and obligation of the Member States and the Commission according to Article 325 TFEU. 
Boj proti goljufijam, ki škodijo proračunu EU, je v skladu s členom 325 PDEU skupna naloga in obveznost držav članic in Komisije.
X. Recommendation 1: The Commission partially accepts the recommendation. 
X. Priporočilo 1: Komisija delno sprejema to priporočilo.
The Commission, in close cooperation with the Member States, has considerably improved its irregularity reporting system over the past years, allowing for a better and more refined analysis. 
Komisija je v zadnjih letih v tesnem sodelovanju z državami članicami bistveno izboljšala svoj sistem prijavljanja nepravilnosti, s čimer je omogočila boljšo in bolj izpopolnjeno analizo.
The Commission is committed to further improve the reporting of irregularities and fraud and the analysis of the nature of fraud, including on the basis of tailored data collection and a better understanding of the overall anti-fraud framework in the different Member States. 
Komisija se zavezuje, da bo prijavljanje nepravilnosti in goljufij ter analizo narave goljufij še izboljšala, med drugim na podlagi prilagojenega zbiranja podatkov in boljšega razumevanja splošnega okvira za boj proti goljufijam v različnih državah članicah.
It is, however, not possible to establish an estimate of the scale of the undetected fraud which is reliable and defendable enough for evidence-based policy, also taking into account the constraint of the efficient use of the limited resources available to the Commission. 
Vendar ni mogoča ocena obsega neodkritih goljufij, ki bi bila dovolj zanesljiva in utemeljena za z dokazi podprto politiko, tako da bi se upoštevala tudi omejitev učinkovite uporabe omejenih virov, ki jih ima na voljo Komisija.
See detailed Commission replies to recommendation 1 in the conclusions and recommendations section at the end. 
Glej podrobne odgovore Komisije na priporočilo 1 v oddelku s sklepnimi ugotovitvami in priporočili na koncu.
Recommendation 2: The Commission partially accepts the recommendation in as far as it concerns the adoption of a new comprehensive anti-fraud strategy. 
Priporočilo 2: Komisija delno sprejema to priporočilo, in sicer v delu, ki se nanaša na sprejetje nove celovite strategije za boj proti goljufijam.
Please refer to the Commission's reply to Recommendation 2 in the recommendations and conclusions section regarding the possible timeline for a comprehensive analysis of fraud risks. 
V zvezi z mogočo časovnico za celovito analizo tveganja goljufij glej odgovor Komisije na priporočilo 2 v oddelku s priporočili in sklepnimi ugotovitvami.
Regarding the recommendation relating to the portfolio of a given Commissioner, the Commission considers that its current internal organisation in practical terms already reflects the recommendation. 
Kar zadeva priporočilo glede portfelja posameznega komisarja, Komisija meni, da se priporočilo upošteva že pri njeni sedanji notranji ureditvi.
See also Commission's reply to paragraphs 50-54. 
Glej tudi odgovor Komisije na odstavke 50–54.
Recommendation 3: First indent: The Commission accepts the recommendation. 
Priporočilo 3: Prva alinea: Komisija sprejema to priporočilo.
1 See Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 on the creation of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) of 12 October 2017. 3 
1 Glej Uredbo Sveta (EU) 2017/1939 z dne 12. oktobra 2017 o ustanovitvi Evropskega javnega tožilstva (EJT). 3
In accordance with the Financial Regulation, the relevant Directorates-General are obliged to use the early detection and exclusion system where the circumstances require it. 
V skladu s finančno uredbo morajo zadevni generalni direktorati uporabljati sistem za zgodnje odkrivanje in izključitev, kadar to zahtevajo okoliščine.
Several actions have already been conducted to promote the use of EDES. 
Za spodbujanje uporabe tega sistema je bilo izvedenih že več ukrepov.
The Commission will continue to call on the Member States to identify and flag fraudulent economic operators. 
Komisija bo države članice še naprej pozivala k odkrivanju goljufivih gospodarskih subjektov in opozarjanju nanje.
A modification of the Financial Regulation by the legislator would be necessary in order to oblige the Member States as far as shared management is concerned to flag fraudulent economic operators. 
Da bi imele države članice, kar zadeva deljeno upravljanje, obveznost opozarjati na goljufive gospodarske subjekte, bi moral zakonodajalec spremeniti finančno uredbo.
The Commission had initially proposed a clear obligation for the Member States to use IMS data as grounds for exclusion (COM(2014)358). 
Komisija je prvotno predlagala jasno obveznost držav članic, da podatke sistema za upravljanje nepravilnosti uporabijo kot razloge za izključitev (COM(2014) 358).
However, Member States opposed any obligation to exclude on the basis of the information they provide in IMS. 
Vendar so države članice nasprotovale kakršni koli obveznosti izključitve na podlagi informacij, ki jih zagotovijo v sistemu za upravljanje nepravilnosti.
See detailed Commission replies in the conclusions and recommendations section at the end. 
Glej podrobne odgovore Komisije v oddelku s sklepnimi ugotovitvami in priporočili na koncu.
The Commission has provided information on the ARACHNE system in all Member States. 
Komisija je zagotovila informacije o sistemu ARACHNE v vseh državah članicah.
However, ARACHNE is used on a voluntary basis as there is no legal obligation to enforce its use. 
Vendar se sistem ARACHNE uporablja na prostovoljni podlagi, saj ni nobene pravne obveznosti, s katero bi se zahtevala njegova uporaba.
The Commission will continue to provide assistance to the authorities concerned. 
Komisija bo še naprej zagotavljala pomoč zadevnim organom.
Recommendation 4: The Commission partially accepts the recommendation. 
Priporočilo 4: Komisija delno sprejema to priporočilo.
The Commission has already taken action to adapt OLAF’s legislative framework and operations in view of the setting-up of the EPPO by putting forward a proposal to revise Regulation 883/2013 (COM(2018)338). 
Komisija je že sprejela ukrepe, da bi glede na ustanovitev EJT prilagodila zakonodajni okvir in dejavnosti urada OLAF, tako da je predložila predlog za revizijo Uredbe št.883/2013 (COM(2018) 338).
The fight against fraud will be reinforced through complementary action by the EPPO and OLAF. 
Z dopolnjevanjem med ukrepi EJT in urada OLAF se bo boj proti goljufijam še okrepil.
OLAF’s fundamental role and responsibility of fighting fraud in EU spending through administrative investigations will not change, however, with the setting up of the EPPO. 
Vendar se temeljna vloga in odgovornost urada OLAF za boj proti goljufijam pri porabi EU z ustanovitvijo EJT ne bosta spremenili.
The Commission shares the ECA’s view that OLAF could assume a stronger role with regard to the anti-fraud policies of the Commission services and executive agencies. 
Komisija se strinja z mnenjem Evropskega računskega sodišča, da bi lahko urad OLAF prevzel večjo vlogo v zvezi s politikami služb in izvajalskih agencij Komisije na področju boja proti goljufijam.
Such a strengthened role is being considered in the upcoming update of the Commission Anti-Fraud Strategy (CAFS). 
Tako okrepljena vloga je upoštevana v prihodnji posodobitvi strategije Komisije za boj proti goljufijam.
Vis-à-vis the Member States, OLAF will continue to perform its coordinating and advisory functions, notably as the lead service for irregularity reporting and the Advisory Committee for the Coordination of Fraud Prevention. 
V razmerju do držav članic bo urad OLAF še naprej opravljal svoje usklajevalne in svetovalne funkcije, in sicer kot glavna služba za prijavljanje nepravilnosti in Svetovalni odbor za usklajevanje preprečevanja goljufij.
Likewise, the Authorising Officers responsible in the Directorates-General in charge of shared management will continue to exercise their responsibilities with regard to the Member States. 
Podobno bodo tudi odgovorni odredbodajalci v generalnih direktoratih, pristojnih za deljeno upravljanje, še naprej izvajali svoje pristojnosti v zvezi z državami članicami.
Articles 317 and 325 TFEU lay down the Member States’ duty to cooperate in, and joint responsibility for, the protection of the Union’s financial interests in a more general manner. 
Člena 317 in 325 PDEU splošneje določata dolžnost držav članic, da sodelujejo pri zaščiti finančnih interesov Unije, in njihovo skupno odgovornost za zaščito teh interesov.
That responsibility includes, inter alia, further areas of shared management of EU expenditure, as well as the revenue side of the Union budget. 
Ta odgovornost med drugim vključuje nadaljnja področja deljenega upravljanja odhodkov EU, pa tudi dohodkovno stran proračuna Unije.
The specific issues raised by the ECA regarding the Commission's anti-fraud policy cannot be seen in isolation from the important recent legislative initiatives and other developments in the area of the fight against fraud listed in chronological order below:  The revision of the Staff Regulations for officials and other servants of the European Union was made in 2013 to strengthen the legal framework, notably with regard to possible conflicts of interests and increased transparency.  The updated integrated control framework and peer review of fraud risk was adopted by the Commission on 19 April 2017, under which the most important risks (including fraud) are 4 
Posebnih vprašanj, na katera je Evropsko računsko sodišče opozorilo v zvezi s politiko Komisije na področju boja proti goljufijam, ni mogoče obravnavati ločeno od nedavnih pomembnih zakonodajnih pobud in drugega razvoja dogodkov na področju boja proti goljufijam, ki so v nadaljevanju navedeni v kronološkem vrstnem redu:  Leta 2013 je bila opravljena revizija kadrovskih predpisov za uradnike in druge uslužbence Evropske unije, da bi se okrepil pravni okvir, zlasti glede na morebitna navzkrižja interesov in večjo preglednost. 4
assessed by the responsible Authorising Officers, reported on in their Annual Activity Reports and discussed with central services in a peer review process.  The Directive on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law (PIF Directive) was adopted by the co-legislator on 5 July 2017. 
 Komisija je 19. aprila 2017 sprejela posodobljen integriran okvir kontrole in strokovni pregled tveganja goljufij, v okviru katerih najpomembnejša tveganja (vključno z goljufijami) ocenjujejo odgovorni odredbodajalci, ki o teh tveganjih poročajo v svojih letnih poročilih o dejavnostih in o njih razpravljajo z osrednjimi službami v postopku strokovnega pregleda.  Sozakonodajalec je 5. julija 2017 sprejel Direktivo o boju proti goljufijam, ki škodijo finančnim interesom Unije, z uporabo kazenskega prava (direktiva o zaščiti finančnih interesov).
Member States have two years (until 6 July 2019) to transpose it into their national legislation. 
Države članice jo morajo v dveh letih (do 6. julija 2019) prenesti v nacionalno zakonodajo.
The Directive provides a harmonised legal framework reducing obstacles to an effective cooperation, notably by harmonising the definition of four criminal offences (fraud, corruption, money laundering and misappropriation) as well as sanctions and limitation periods. 
Direktiva določa usklajen zakonodajni okvir, s katerim se zmanjšujejo ovire za učinkovito sodelovanje, zlasti z uskladitvijo opredelitve štirih kaznivih dejanj (goljufije, korupcije, pranja denarja in protipravne prilastitve) ter tudi sankcij in zastaralnih rokov.
The material competence of the EPPO is based on the PIF Directive.  Regulation 2017/1939 setting up the EPPO has been adopted in November 2017. 
Stvarna pristojnost EJT temelji na direktivi o zaščiti finančnih interesov.  Novembra2017 je bila sprejeta Uredba 2017/1939 o ustanovitvi EJT.
The EPPO is expected to start operating from late 2020 or early 2021 onwards in 22 Member States and will be competent to investigate crimes against the EU budget including serious cross-border VAT fraud over EUR 10 million. 
EJT naj bi konec leta 2020 ali na začetku leta 2021 začelo delovati v 22 državah članicah, pristojno pa bo za preiskovanje kaznivih dejanj, ki škodijo proračunu EU, vključno z resnimi čezmejnimi goljufijami na področju DDV, ki presegajo 10 milijonov EUR.