natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In the Court’s opinion, Sisnet’s annual accounts4 present fairly, in all material respects, its financial position as at 31 December 2012 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year then ended, in accordance with the provisions of its Financial Regulation. 
Po mnenju Sodišča letni računovodski izkazi Sisneta4 v vseh pomembnih vidikih pošteno predstavljajo njegov finančni položaj na dan 31. decembra 2012 ter njegov poslovni izid in denarne tokove za tedaj končano leto v skladu z določbami njegove finančne uredbe.
Opinion on the legality and regularity of the transactions underlying the accounts 10. In the Court’s opinion, the transactions underlying Sisnet’s annual accounts for the financial year ended 31 December 2012 are legal and regular in all material respects. 
Mnenje o zakonitosti in pravilnosti z izkazi povezanih transakcij 10.Po mnenju Sodišča so transakcije, povezane z letnimi računovodskimi izkazi Sisneta za proračunsko leto, ki se je končalo 31. decembra 2012, v vseh pomembnih pogledih zakonite in pravilne.
11.The comment which follows does not call the Court’s opinions into question. 
11.Zaradi naslednje pripombe mnenji Sodišča nista vprašljivi.
COMMMENT ON THE BUDGETARY AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 12.At the end of 2012, the balance of the bank account designated for the “Sisnet” operations was 2,7 million euro, which is a reduction of 0,5 million euro compared to the previous year. 
PRIPOMBA O UPRAVLJANJU PRORAČUNA IN FINANČNEM POSLOVODENJU 12.Konec leta 2012 je bilo na bančnem računu, odprtem za delovanje Sisneta, 2,7 milijona EUR, kar je 0,5 milijona EUR manj kot leto prej.
However, the Court reiterates that keeping large cash balances does not comply with the principle of sound financial management and indicates weaknesses in the budgetary programming and execution. 
Kljub temu Sodišče znova poudarja, da je visoko stanje na računu v nasprotju z načelom dobrega finančnega poslovodenja in kaže na slabosti pri načrtovanju in izvrševanju proračuna.
4 The annual accounts were drawn up on 27 March 2013 and received by the Court on 5 April 2013. 
4 Letni računovodski izkazi so bili pripravljeni 27. marca 2013, Sodišče pa jih je prejelo 5. aprila 2013.
5 This report was adopted by Chamber IV, headed by Mr Louis GALEA, Member of the Court of Auditors, in Luxembourg at its meeting of 18 June 2013. 
5 To poročilo je sprejel senat IV, ki ga vodi g. Louis GALEA, član Evropskega računskega sodišča, v Luxembourgu na zasedanju 18. junija 2013.
For the Court of Auditors Vítor Manuel da SILVA CALDEIRA President RIP004634EN02-13PP-CH260-13FIN-RAS-SISNET_2012-OR.DOC 18.6.2013 
Za Računsko sodišče Vítor Manuel da SILVA CALDEIRA Predsednik
Report on the annual accounts of Sisnet (communication network for exchange of information between national border control, customs and police authorities) for the financial year ended 31 December 2015 12, rue Alcide De Gasperi - L - 1615 Luxembourg T (+352) 4398 Đ 1 E eca-info@eca.europa.eu eca.europa.eu 
Poročilo o letnih računovodskih izkazih Sisneta (komunikacijsko omrežje za izmenjavo informacij med nacionalnimi organi, pristojnimi za nadzor meja, carinskimi in policijskimi organi) za proračunsko leto, ki se je končalo 31. decembra 2015 12, rue Alcide De Gasperi – L - 1615 Luxembourg T (+352) 4398 – 1 E eca-info@eca.europa.eu eca.europa.eu
This audit report concerns the contracts in respect of the installation and functioning of the communication infrastructure ŇSisnetÓ between the signatory States of the Schengen agreements. 
To revizijsko poročilo se nanaša na pogodbe med državami podpisnicami schengenskih sporazumov v zvezi z namestitvijo in delovanjem komunikacijske infrastrukture „Sisnet”.
In 2015, expenditure for these contracts amounted to 476 000 euro, financed by contributions from the Member States of the European Union (except Cyprus and Croatia) plus Iceland, Norway, Liechtenstein and Switzerland1. 
V letu 2015 so odhodki za te pogodbe znašali 476 000 EUR. Odhodki se financirajo s prispevki držav članic Evropske unije (razen Cipra in Hrvaške) ter Islandije, Norveške, Lihtenštajna in Švice.
2. 
1 2.
The Schengen Area Visa Information System, which has replaced Sisnet and is managed by the European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice, became fully operational in January 2016. 
Vizumski informacijski sistem za schengensko območje, ki je nadomestil Sisnet in ki ga upravlja Evropska agencija za operativno upravljanje obsežnih informacijskih sistemov s področja svobode, varnosti in pravice, je začel v celoti delovati januarja 2016.
Following an observation period of two months, during which Sisnet was maintained in stand-by mode, the Agency confirmed in March 2016 that the functionalities of Sisnet were fully integrated into the Visa Information System and that Sisnet could cease operations. 
Po dvomesečnem obdobju opazovanja, v katerem je bil Sisnet ohranjen kot rezerva, je Agencija marca 2016 potrdila, da so funkcije Sisneta popolnoma integrirane v vizumski informacijski sistem in da Sisnet lahko neha delovati.
The contracts for the installation and the functioning of Sisnet were terminated on 26 April 2016. 
Pogodbe za namestitev in delovanje Sisneta so nehale veljati 26. aprila 2016.
The financial mechanism for the Sisnet contracts is expected to be wound up in the second half of 2016. 
Pričakuje se, da bo finančni mehanizem za pogodbe za Sisnet likvidiran v drugi polovici leta 2016.
2 1 Since 2013, contributions are no longer made by Bulgaria, Ireland, Romania and United Kingdom. 
2 1 Od leta 2013 teh prispevkov ne plačujejo več Bolgarija, Irska, Romunija in Združeno kraljestvo.
Europol and Eurojust have also ceased making contributions as from 2014. 
Z letom 2014 sta jih nehala plačevati tudi Europol in Eurojust.
CH4078825EN02-16PP-CH162-16FIN-RAS-SISNET_2015-OR.docx 7.6.2016 
CH4078825SL02-16PP-CH162-16FIN-RAS-SISNET_2015-TR.docx 7.6.2016
2 3 4 OJ L 85, 6.4.2000, p. 
2 3 4 UL L 85, 6.4.2000, str.
OJ L 323, 10.12.2009, p. 
UL L 323, 10.12.2009, str.
The annual accounts include the revenue and expenditure account and the balance sheet accompanied by explanatory notes. 
Letni računovodski izkazi vključujejo izkaz prihodkov in odhodkov ter bilanco stanja, ki so jim priložena pojasnila.
3 STATEMENT OF ASSURANCE 4. 
3 IZJAVA O ZANESLJIVOSTI 4.
Pursuant to the provisions of Article 47(1) of Council Decision 2000/265/EC2 as last amended by Council Decision 2009/915/EC3 (the ŇSisnet Financial RegulationÓ) and in accordance with the Decision of the Court of Auditors of 23 March 2000, the Court has audited the annual accounts4 of Sisnet for the financial year ended 31 December 2015, and the legality and regularity of the transactions underlying those accounts. 
Sodišče je v skladu z določbami člena 47(1) Sklepa Sveta št. 2000/265/ES2, kakor je bil nazadnje spremenjen s Sklepom Sveta 2009/915/ES3 (v nadaljnjem besedilu: finančna uredba Sisnet), in v skladu s sklepom Računskega sodišča z dne 23. marca 2000 revidiralo letne računovodske izkaze Sisneta4 za proračunsko leto, ki se je končalo 31. decembra 2015, ter zakonitost in pravilnost transakcij, povezanih s temi izkazi.
The Court's opinions are addressed to the signatory States in accordance with Article 48 of the Sisnet Financial Regulation. 
Mnenji Sodišča sta v skladu s členom 48 finančne uredbe Sisnet naslovljeni na države podpisnice.
The authorising officer of Sisnet implements the revenue and expenditure of the budget in accordance with the financial rules provided for in Articles 12 to 45 of the Sisnet Financial Regulation. 
Odredbodajalec Sisneta izvršuje prihodke in odhodke proračuna v skladu s finančnimi pravili, določenimi v členih od 12 do 45 finančne uredbe Sisnet.
The final accounts are drawn up by the Deputy Secretary-General of the Council in accordance with Articles 46 and 47 of the Sisnet Financial Regulation. 
Končne računovodske izkaze pripravi namestnik generalnega sekretarja Sveta v skladu s členoma 46 in 47 finančne uredbe Sisnet.
These Articles determine the responsibilities of the authorising officer of Sisnet and the Deputy Secretary-General. These persons are in charge of (a) drawing up the annual accounts of Sisnet, (b) putting in place the organisational structure and the internal management and control systems and procedures relevant for drawing up final accounts that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and (c) ensuring that the transactions underlying those accounts are legal and regular. 
V teh členih je določena odgovornost odredbodajalca Sisneta in namestnika generalnega sekretarja, ki sta odgovorna za (a) pripravo letnih računovodskih izkazov Sisneta, (b) vzpostavitev organizacijske strukture, notranjih upravljavskih in kontrolnih sistemov ter postopkov za pripravo končnih računovodskih izkazov brez pomembno napačne navedbe zaradi goljufije ali napake ter (c) za zagotovitev zakonitosti in pravilnosti transakcij, povezanih s temi izkazi.
The CourtŐs responsibility is, on the basis of its audit, to provide a statement of assurance as to the reliability of the annual accounts of Sisnet and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions. 
Sodišče je odgovorno, da na podlagi svoje revizije predloži izjavo o zanesljivosti letnih računovodskih izkazov Sisneta ter o zakonitosti in pravilnosti z njimi povezanih transakcij.
5 The annual accounts were drawn up on 1 April 2016 and received by the Court on 6 April 2016. 
5 Letni računovodski izkazi so bili pripravljeni 1. aprila 2016, Sodišče pa jih je prejelo 6. aprila 2016.
The audit also entails evaluating the appropriateness of the accounting policies, the reasonableness of accounting estimates and the overall presentation of the accounts. 
Med revizijo se tudi ovrednotijo primernost računovodskih usmeritev, sprejemljivost računovodskih ocen in celotna predstavitev računovodskih izkazov.
In the CourtŐs opinion, SisnetŐs annual accounts5 present fairly, in all material respects, its financial position as at 31 December 2015 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year then ended, in accordance with the provisions of its Financial Regulation. 
Po mnenju Sodišča letni računovodski izkazi Sisneta5 v vseh pomembnih vidikih pošteno predstavljajo njegov finančni položaj na dan 31. decembra 2015 ter njegov poslovni izid in denarne tokove za tedaj končano leto v skladu z določbami njegove finančne uredbe.
Opinion on the legality and regularity of the transactions underlying the accounts 12. 
Mnenje o zakonitosti in pravilnosti z izkazi povezanih transakcij 12.
In the CourtŐs opinion, the transactions underlying SisnetŐs annual accounts for the financial year ended 31 December 2015 are legal and regular in all material respects. 
Po mnenju Sodišča so transakcije, povezane z letnimi računovodskimi izkazi Sisneta za proračunsko leto, ki se je končalo 31. decembra 2015, v vseh pomembnih pogledih zakonite in pravilne.
This Report was adopted by Chamber IV, headed by Mr Baudilio TOM MUGURUZA, Member of the Court of Auditors, in Luxembourg at its meeting of 7 June 2016. 
To poročilo je sprejel senat IV, ki ga vodi Baudilio TOMÉ MUGURUZA, član Evropskega računskega sodišča, v Luxembourgu na zasedanju 7. junija 2016.
For the Court of Auditors Vtor Manuel da SILVA CALDEIRA President 5 CH4078825EN02-16PP-CH162-16FIN-RAS-SISNET_2015-OR.docx 7.6.2016 
Za Računsko sodišče Vítor Manuel da SILVA CALDEIRA Predsednik 5 CH4078825SL02-16PP-CH162-16FIN-RAS-SISNET_2015-TR.docx 7.6.2016
30.11.2004 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 295/1 I (Information) COURT OF AUDITORS SPECIAL REPORT No 2/2004 concerning pre-accession aid HAS SAPARD BEEN WELL MANAGED? together with the CommissionŐs replies (pursuant to the second subparagraph of article 248(4) of the EC Treaty) (2004/C 295/01) CONTENTS EXECUTIVESUMMARY ...................................................... 
2/2004 v zvezi s predpristopno pomočjo ALI JE BIL SAPARD DOBRO UPRAVLJAN? skupaj z odgovori Komisije (v skladu z drugim poodstavkom člena 248(4) Pogodbe ES) (2004/C 295/01) KAZALO POVZETEK...................................................................
INTRODUCTION ........................................................... 
GLAVNIREZULTATISAPARDA..................................................
HowdidweauditSapard? ................................................ 
Omejenučinekvosmihoddesetihdržav .......................................
STAGESINTHEIMPLEMENTATIONOFSAPARD ................................. 
VključitevDDVmedupravičeneizdatkeneprispevakciljemSaparda .................
Largeproportionsofavailablefundsremainedunused .......................... becauseofthetimeneededforsettinguptheprogramme ........................ andbecauseofdelaysinimplementationbytheSapardcountries .................. 
Ciljinisobilivednojasnoopredeljeni .......................................... in poročanje o ciljih in prednostnih nalogah Komisije ni bilo v skladu z zahtevami . . . . . . .
Keystepshavenotbeenanalysedsothatlessonscanbelearned ................... andbudgetsweresystematicallyunder-utilised................................. DECENTRALISEDIMPLEMENTATION........................................... wasachoicebytheCommission ........................................... but the lack of preparation by the Commission and the tight time frame led to difficulties withdecentralisation..................................................... and the CommissionŐs management was not always suited to Sapard countriesŐ needs MAINRESULTSOFSAPARD .................................................. 
Institucionalnakrepitevjebilauspešna,razenprikmetijskemokolju ..................
Limitedimpactin8outof10countries...................................... 
Predhodna odobritev sistemov je zagotovila sisteme tesne finančne kontrole . . . . . . . . . . . .
VAT included as eligible expenditure does not contribute to Sapard objectives . . . . . . . . TherewaslittlecontributiontoachievingÔEUstandardsŐ ......................... Targetswerenotalwaysclear .............................................. and reporting on objectives and priorities by the Commission was not as required Institution building has been positive except for agri-environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
Priloga 1 Razčlenitev prispevkov EU za obdobje 2000–2003 po državah ter po glavnih vrstah in ukrepov . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C 295/2 EN Official Journal of the European Union 30.11.2004 ASSESSMENTOFSYSTEMSSETUPINSAPARDCOUNTRIES ........................ 
Odstavek Stran 58–80 11 58–60 11 61–65 11 66–67 12 68–76 12 77–80 13 81–97 13 81–90 13 91–95 14 96–97 15 98–109 15 98–103 15 104–109 16 110–121 16 upravičencev ...........
Systemsweregenerallyworkinginpractice ................................... buttherewasalackofsupportingelementsinfiles ............................. 
18 Priloga2 Seznampregledanihprojektov .......................................................
19 TheCommissionreplies................................................................ 
19 OdgovoriKomisije.......................................................................
30.11.2004 EN Official Journal of the European Union EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I. The Special Accession Programme for Agriculture and Rural Development (Sapard) is the first external aid programme which is implemented in a decentralised manner. 
30.11.2004 SL Uradni list Evropske unije C 295/3 POVZETEK I. Posebni pristopni program za kmetijstvo in razvoj podeželja (Sapard) je prvi program zunanje pomoči, ki se ga izvaja decentralizirano.
The objectives of the programme are to contribute to the implementation of the Community acquis and to solve problems for the adaptation of the agricultural sector and rural areas in the 10 countries which benefit from Sapard aid (1). 
Cilji programa so prispevati k izvrševanju pravnega reda Skupnosti in rešiti probleme pri prilagajanju kmetijskega sektorja in podeželja v desetih državah, ki prejemajo pomoč Saparda (1).
These 10 countries are hereafter referred to as Ôthe Sapard countriesŐ. 
Teh deset držav se v nadaljnjem besedilu imenuje „države Saparda“.
Due to the large increase in the pre-accession budget, which for Sapard was to be managed by newly created structures under newly created rules, the Court performed an audit which aimed at answering the question: ÔHas Sapard been well managed?Ő (see paragraphs 1 to 10). 
Zaradi velikega povečanja proračuna za predpristopno pomoč, ki bi ga morale za Sapard upravljati novo ustanovljene strukture pod novo ustvarjenimi pogoji, je Sodišče opravilo revizijo, ki je skušala odgovoriti na vprašanje, ali je bil Sapard dobro upravljan (glej odstavke 1–10).
The answer to that question is that management has been of mixed quality. 
Odgovor na to vprašanje je, da je bila kvaliteta upravljanja različna.
Although there were substantial delays in getting Sapard under way some were caused by a failure on the part of the Commission to plan as early as possible. 
Čeprav je prišlo do večjih zamud pri vzpostavitvi delovanja Saparda, so nekatere nastale, ker se Komisija ni dovolj zgodaj lotila načrtovanja.
That said, the pace of the implementation of Sapard has increased but the main objectives had not been achieved by the end of 2003. 
Hitrost izvajanja Saparda se je sicer povečala, vendar pa glavni cilji do konca leta 2003 niso bili doseženi.
There have been delays in implementation in most of the Sapard countries caused in part by a lack of guidance and advice from the Commission and the steep learning curve that the countries faced, and some measures have not been activated. 
Pri izvajanju programa je v večini držav Saparda prišlo do zamud, ki jih je deloma povzročilo pomanjkanje vodenja in svetovanja s strani Komisije, pa tudi hiter postopek uvajanja, s katerim so se te države soočile, poleg tega pa se določeni ukrepi niso izvajali.
Large proportions of available funds remained unused and budgets were systematically over-estimated, because considerable time was needed to set up and implement Sapard. 
Velik del razpoložljivih sredstev je ostal neizkoriščen, proračuni pa so bili sistematično precenjevani, ker je bilo za vzpostavitev in izvajanje Saparda potrebno veliko časa.
Detailed implementation principles and rules were not ready when the Council adopted the Sapard Regulation in June 1999. 
Ko je Svet junija 1999 sprejel uredbo o Sapardu, podrobna izvedbena načela in pravila še niso bila pripravljena.
Systems needed to be set up in the Sapard countries, which took a long time in some cases, for which the Commission did not analyse the reasons. 
V državah Saparda je bilo treba vzpostaviti sisteme, kar je v nekaterih primerih trajalo zelo dolgo, vzrokov za to pa Komisija ni analizirala.
Since the start of Sapard in the countries concerned, heavy administrative procedures, stricter than required by the Sapard rules, have hampered a rapid and efficient implementation of the programme (see paragraphs 11 to 25). 
Od vzpostavitve Saparda v zadevnih državah so zapleteni administrativni postopki, strožji, kot jih zahtevajo predpisi Saparda, zavirali hitro in učinkovito izvajanje programa (glej odstavke 11–25).
The CommissionŐs option for decentralised implementation was correct given the likely large numbers of projects to be financed, but it under-estimated the time which would be needed for this to be done. 
Odločitev Komisije za decentralizirano izvajanje programa je bila pravilna glede na verjetnost, da bo financiranih veliko število projektov, vendar pa je Komisija neustrezno ocenila čas, ki bo za to potreben.
Although the Commission organised seminars and had other contacts with Sapard countries, its decentralised management for Sapard does not guarantee that implementation problems are actively and systematically identified and followed up. 
Čeprav je Komisija organizirala seminarje in imela tudi druge stike z državami Saparda, pa njeno decentralizirano upravljanje Saparda ne zagotavlja aktivnega in sistematičnega odkrivanja ter reševanja problemov izvajanja.
Because of this, best practices were not applied in all the Sapard countries (see paragraphs 26 to 35). 
Zaradi tega niso bile uporabljene najboljše prakse v vseh državah Saparda (glej odstavke 26–35).
V. In the first four years of implementation, only 323 million euro (14,8 %) of the available budget of 2 183 million euro was paid to final beneficiaries. 
V. V prvih štirih letih izvajanja programa je bilo končnim upravičencem izplačanih samo 323 milijonov eurov (14,8 %) od razpoložljivih 2 183 milijonov eurov.
Due to the low level of spending during the pre-accession period, which for 8 of 10 of the beneficiary countries is from 1 January 2000 until 1 May 2004, there has been only a minor contribution to the objectives defined for Sapard. 
Zaradi nizke stopnje porabe med predpristopnim obdobjem, ki je za osem od desetih držav trajalo od 1. januarja 2000 do 1. maja 2004, je bilo k ciljem, začr-tanim za Sapard, prispevano zelo malo.
For Bulgaria and Romania, for which the pre-accession period is foreseen to last until 1 January 2007, a much higher impact can be expected. 
Za Bolgarijo in Romunijo, za kateri bo predpristopno obdobje predvidoma trajalo najmanj do 1. januarja 2007, se pričakuje precej boljši rezultat.
In Poland, Sapard will pay at least 17,7 million euro in the form of VAT to the state budget which does not contribute to the objectives of Sapard (see paragraphs 36 to 40). 
Na Poljskem bo Sapard v državni proračun prispeval najmanj 17,7 milijonov eurov v obliki DDV, kar ne prispeva k ciljem Saparda (glej odstavke 36–40).
The first results of completed projects show that the money for agricultural processing has generally been spent on projects which increase the quantity of agricultural production, more than on projects which improve the quality of agricultural production (meeting quality and health standards and protection of the environment) (see paragraphs 41 to 47). 
Prvi rezultati dokončanih projektov kažejo, da je bil denar za kmetijsko predelovanje v glavnem porabljen za projekte, ki povečujejo količino kmetijske proizvodnje, manj pa za projekte, ki izboljšujejo kakovost kmetijske proizvodnje (izpolnjevanje standardov kakovosti, varstva okolja in zdravstvenih standardov) (glej odstavke 41–47).
The Commission did not report on how well Sapard achieved its objectives, but instead focused on institution building. 
Komisija ni poročala o tem, v kolikšni meri je Sapard izpolnil svoje cilje, ampak se je osredotočila na institucionalni razvoj.
This has been positive, because Sapard could provide national administrations with hands-on experience for the management of EU funds after accession. 
To je bilo pozitivno, saj je Sapard državnim upravam zagotovil praktične izkušnje pri upravljanju sredstev EU po pristopu.
However, for one of the most important measures after accession, agri-environment, the effect was limited (see paragraphs 48 to 57). 
Vendar pa je bil za enega izmed najpomembnejših ukrepov po pristopu, kmetijsko okolje, učinek omejen (glej odstavke 48–57).
A requirement under Sapard is prior approval, by the Commission, based on its audits, of the systems set up by the countries concerned. 
V okviru zahtev Saparda mora Komisija predhodno odobriti sisteme, ki jih vzpostavijo zadevne države, in sicer na podlagi svojih revizij.
This has ensured that well-defined systems with key controls were in place before any funds could be spent. 
To je zagotovilo, da so bili natančno določeni sistemi s ključnimi kontrolami pripravljeni za uporabo, še preden so bila sredstva lahko porabljena.
This requirement is a key difference from comparable programmes in Member States, which can start with implementation without such audits or prior approval of the systems by the Commission (see paragraphs 58 to 60). 
Prav v tej zahtevi se Sapard bistveno razlikuje od primerljivih programov v državah članicah, ki se lahko začnejo izvajati brez tovrstnih revizij ali predhodnih odobritev sistemov s strani Komisije (glej odstavke 58–60).
(1) These 10 countries are: Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia and Romania. 
(1) Te države so: Bolgarija, Češka, Estonija, Madžarska, Latvija, Litva, Poljska, Slovaška, Slovenija in Romunija.