natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Commission highlights that the amount of the recovery orders issued by DG CNECT and DG RTD as a follow-up to OLAF final reports exceeds the total value of the recommendations sent to the Directorates-General. 
Komisija poudarja, da znesek nalogov za izterjavo, ki sta jih GD za komunikacijska omrežja, vsebine in tehnologijo ter GD za raziskave in inovacije izdala na podlagi končnih poročil urada OLAF, presega skupno vrednost priporočil, poslanih generalnim direktoratom.
A substantial part of the recoveries was hampered by liquidation of the beneficiaries concerned after the OLAF investigation. 
Precejšen del izterjav je preprečila likvidacija zadevnih upravičencev po preiskavi urada OLAF.
This is particularly the case for DG CNECT, where the liquidations prevented the recovery of EUR 7.86 million, accounting for more than 50% of the total amounts for which recovery orders were established. 
preprečena izterjava 7,86 milijona EUR, kar je več kot 50 % skupnih zneskov, za katere so bili izdani nalogi za izterjavo.
22 As reported by the ECA, recovery usually takes several years. 
Kot poroča Evropsko računsko sodišče, je za izterjavo po navadi potrebnih več let.
The recovery process continues for many financial recommendations issued during the period 2012–2016 and was still pending at the time of the ECA audit. 
Postopek izterjave se v zvezi s številnimi finančnimi priporočili, izdanimi v obdobju 2012–2016, nadaljuje in je bil v času revizije Evropskega računskega sodišča še v teku.
OLAF's instructions on financial recommendations (see Commission's reply to paragraph 115) clarify, inter alia, how to determine the relevant amounts, including the estimated amounts to be recovered using, where possible, IBOA's own rules. 
V navodilih urada OLAF v zvezi s finančnimi priporočili (glej odgovor Komisije na odstavek 115) je med drugim pojasnjeno, kako določiti ustrezne zneske, vključno z ocenjenimi zneski, ki jih je treba izterjati, tako da se po možnosti uporabijo lastna pravila institucij, organov, uradov ali agencij.
The Commission takes note of the 20 cases examined and would like to add that also other Directorates-General than DG CNECT and DG RTD are involved in direct management. 
Komisija je seznanjena z 20 preučenimi primeri ter želi dodati, da so poleg GD za komunikacijska omrežja, vsebine in tehnologijo ter GD za raziskave in inovacije v neposredno upravljanje vključeni tudi drugi generalni direktorati.
First bullet point: OLAF’s final reports can be used in financial and administrative procedures unless OLAF indicates specific reasons why this cannot be done due to the criminal investigation. 
Prva točka: Končna poročila urada OLAF se lahko uporabijo v finančnih in upravnih postopkih, razen če urad OLAF posebej ne pojasni, da to ni mogoče zaradi kazenske preiskave.
See also Commission's reply to paragraph 110. 
Glej tudi odgovor Komisije na odstavek 110.
Second bullet point: See Commission's reply to paragraph 109. 
Druga točka: Glej odgovor Komisije na odstavek 109.
In case a spending DG is of the view that a final report does not contain clear or adequate evidence, it may contact OLAF and ask for clarifications. 
Če generalni direktorat porabnik meni, da končno poročilo ne vsebuje jasnih ali ustreznih dokazov, se lahko obrne na urad OLAF in zaprosi za pojasnila.
Third bullet point: The Commission would like to point out that in many cases the liquidation following insolvency of a beneficiary happens after the closure of the case by OLAF, after the recovery order has been issued or the enforceable decision taken. 
Tretja točka: Komisija želi poudariti, da v številnih primerih do likvidacije na podlagi insolventnosti upravičenca pride po tem, ko urad OLAF primer konča, ko je izdan nalog za izterjavo ali ko je sprejeta izvršljiva odločba.
The scope and nature of an audit is different from that of an OLAF investigation and will not cover aspects such as corruption, fraud and other serious financial irregularities. 
Obseg in narava revizije se razlikujeta od obsega in narave preiskave urada OLAF ter ne vključujeta vidikov, kot so korupcija, goljufije in druge resne finančne nepravilnosti.
Audits may not identify the full amount to be recovered and may not necessarily lead to exclusion of entities by the EDES panel. 
Z revizijami se morda ne opredeli celotni znesek, ki ga je treba izterjati, prav tako ne vodijo nujno do izključitve subjektov s strani komisije sistema za zgodnje odkrivanje in izključitev.
See also Commission's reply to paragraph 109. 
Glej tudi odgovor Komisije na odstavek 109.
The number of such actions is limited in relation to the number of recommendations issued by OLAF. 
Število takih ukrepov je omejeno glede na število priporočil, ki jih izda urad OLAF.
Common reply to paragraphs 122-123: The Commission notes that also DG NEAR and DG ECHO are recipients of OLAF financial recommendations in the field of indirect management. 
Skupni odgovor na odstavka 122 in 123: Komisija opozarja, da sta prejemnika finančnih priporočil urada OLAF na področju posrednega upravljanja tudi GD za sosedstvo in širitvena pogajanja ter GD za evropsko civilno zaščito in evropske operacije humanitarne pomoči.
The ECA states that at the time of the audit recoveries had been made regarding 38% of OLAF's financial recommendations. 
Evropsko računsko sodišče navaja, da so bile v času revizije opravljene izterjave v zvezi z 38 % finančnih priporočil urada OLAF.
Given the time it takes to make meaningful progress in the recovery process, this percentage will further increase over time. 
Glede na čas, potreben za pomemben napredek v postopku izterjave, se bo ta delež sčasoma še povečal.
With regard to the sample, see Commission’s reply to paragraph 117 on direct management which applies mutatis mutandis also for the sample on indirect management. 
Kar zadeva vzorec, glej odgovor Komisije na odstavek 117 v zvezi z neposrednim upravljanjem, ki se smiselno uporablja tudi za vzorec v zvezi s posrednim upravljanjem.
The Commission notes that DG DEVCO’s operations are implemented in a particular context: geographically dispersed operations, high number of operations, diversity of implementing organisations and partner countries and a diversity of aid delivery methods. 
Komisija opozarja, da se operacije GD za mednarodno sodelovanje in razvoj izvajajo v posebnem okviru: geografsko razpršene operacije, veliko število operacij, raznolikost izvajalskih organizacij in partnerskih držav ter različnost metod za zagotovitev pomoči.
In addition, the legal and law enforcement contexts applicable to DG DEVCO's operations are very different compared with operations under shared management and much more diverse. 
Poleg tega sta pravni okvir in okvir kazenskega pregona, ki se uporabljata za operacije tega generalnega direktorata, zelo drugačna kot pri operacijah v okviru deljenega upravljanja ter veliko bolj raznovrstna.
OLAF takes this and the likelihood of recovery into account in its selection procedure. 
Urad OLAF te razlike in verjetnost izterjave upošteva v svojem izbirnem postopku.
It should be noted that many beneficiaries also of external aid are based in Europe and therefore can be excluded from future funding following an OLAF investigation. 
Opozoriti je treba, da imajo tudi številni upravičenci do zunanje pomoči sedež v Evropi, tako da so lahko na podlagi preiskave urada OLAF izključeni iz prihodnjega financiranja.
The default approach of DG DEVCO is to follow OLAF's recommendations. 
Privzeti pristop GD za mednarodno sodelovanje in razvoj je, da upošteva priporočila urada OLAF.
However, when there are important reasons not to follow OLAF's recommendations, DG DEVCO reports back to OLAF on the decision and measures taken. 23 
Kadar obstajajo pomembni razlogi za to, da se priporočila urada OLAF ne upoštevajo, GD za mednarodno sodelovanje in razvoj uradu OLAF poroča o sprejeti odločitvi in ukrepih.
The high-risk environment in which DG DEVCO operates can therefore explain why DG DEVCO sometimes does not follow up on the financial recommendations of OLAF. 
Okolje z velikimi tveganji, v katerem deluje GD za mednarodno sodelovanje in razvoj, je torej lahko razlog, zakaj ta včasih ne upošteva finančnih priporočil urada OLAF.
OLAF and DG DEVCO will engage in a still closer cooperation in order to increase the number of successful recoveries. 
Urad OLAF in GD za mednarodno sodelovanje in razvoj bosta še tesneje sodelovala, da bi se povečalo število uspešnih izterjav.
The EPPO will be a single, independent European prosecution office operating across the participating Member States. 
EJT bo enotno, neodvisno evropsko tožilstvo, ki bo delovalo v sodelujočih državah članicah.
European Delegated Prosecutors will be responsible to investigate, prosecute and bring to judgement crimes affecting the financial interests of the Union, thereby working hand in hand with national law enforcement and judicial authorities. 
Evropski delegirani tožilci bodo odgovorni za preiskavo, pregon in obtožbo kaznivih dejanj, ki vplivajo na finančne interese Unije, pri čemer bodo delovali z roko v roki z nacionalnimi organi pregona in pravosodnimi organi.
European Prosecutors located at central level will, on behalf of the Permanent Chambers, supervise the investigations and prosecutions carried out by the European Delegated Prosecutors or, in exceptional cases, conduct the investigations themselves. 
Evropski tožilci na centralni ravni bodo v imenu stalnih senatov nadzorovali preiskave in pregone, ki jih bodo izvajali evropski delegirani tožilci, ali pa bodo v izjemnih primerih sami vodili preiskave.
This novel approach will substantially enhance the current level of effectiveness and efficiency in the fight against crimes affecting the financial interests of the Union. 
S tem novim pristopom se bo bistveno izboljšala sedanja raven učinkovitosti in uspešnosti v boju proti kaznivim dejanjem, ki škodijo finančnim interesom Unije.
See Commission's replies to paragraphs 97-104. 
Glej odgovore Komisije na odstavke 97–104.
First bullet point: The EPPO represents a very substantial improvement to the current mechanisms of judicial cooperation among Member States. 
Prva točka: Z EJT se zelo pomembno izboljšujejo sedanji mehanizmi pravosodnega sodelovanja med državami članicami.
Moreover, its structure (Permanent Chambers and European Prosecutors from each Member State) is designed to bring in the necessary national expertise while ensuring the development of European investigation and prosecution policies. 
Poleg tega je njegova struktura (stalni senati in evropski tožilci iz vsake države članice) zasnovana tako, da prinaša potrebno nacionalno strokovno znanje ter hkrati zagotavlja razvoj evropskih politik preiskav in pregona.
The decision-making processes in the EPPO take due account of the need for swift investigatory and prosecutorial action and for ensuring a common investigation and prosecution policy of the EPPO. 
Pri postopkih odločanja v EJT se ustrezno upošteva potreba po hitrem ukrepanju na področju preiskav in pregona ter po zagotovitvi skupne politike EJT na področju preiskav in pregona.
The need for internal consultation and translation is inherent to an EU body operating across Member States and tackling cross-border crime. 
Potrebo po internem posvetovanju in prevajanju ima vsak organ EU, ki deluje v državah članicah in se bori proti čezmejnim kaznivim dejanjem.
The investigations of the EPPO will be primarily carried out by the European Delegated Prosecutors under the supervision of the European Prosecutor coming from the same Member State as the European Delegated Prosecutor, and under the direction and instruction of the competent Permanent Chamber. 
Preiskave EJT bodo večinoma vodili evropski delegirani tožilci, ki bodo delovali pod nadzorom evropskega tožilca, ki prihaja iz iste države članice kot evropski delegirani tožilec, ter pod vodstvom in po navodilih pristojnega stalnega senata.
The European Prosecutors sitting in the Permanent Chambers are familiar with the legal system and know the language of the European Delegated Prosecutors they supervise. 
Evropski tožilci, ki sedijo v stalnih senatih, obvladajo pravni sistem in jezik evropskih delegiranih tožilcev, ki jih nadzorujejo.
In addition, the staff in the EPPO headquarters supporting the College and chambers will need to reflect an appropriate coverage and balance of legal systems and languages to support their work. 
Poleg tega bo moralo osebje na sedežu EJT, ki pomaga kolegiju in senatom, ustrezno pokrivati pravne sisteme in jezike ter preklapljati med njimi, da bi jih podprlo pri njihovem delu.
The EPPO Regulation also allows the Permanent Chambers to delegate its decision-making powers to the supervising European Prosecutor in specific cases, where an offence is not serious enough or the proceedings are not complex. 
Uredba o EJT stalnim senatom tudi omogoča, da svoja pooblastila za odločanje v posameznih zadevah, v katerih kaznivo dejanje ni dovolj resno ali postopek ni zapleten, prenesejo na nadzorujočega evropskega tožilca.
The work of the EPPO should, in principle, be carried out in electronic form. 
Delo EJT bi bilo treba načeloma izvajati elektronsko.
This will further facilitate the communication between the European Delegated Prosecutors, the supervising European Prosecutors and the Permanent Chambers. 
To bo še olajšalo komuniciranje med evropskimi delegiranimi tožilci, nadzorujočimi evropskimi tožilci in stalnimi senati.
Should there be need for additional translations, the EPPO may seek such services from the Translation Centre of the bodies of the EU. 
Če bi bili potrebni dodatni prevodi, lahko EJT za take storitve zaprosi Prevajalski center za organe EU.
Second bullet point: The Commission does not share the ECA's assessment. 
Druga točka: Komisija se ne strinja z oceno Evropskega računskega sodišča.
The EPPO will be directly responsible for the investigations, prosecutions and bringing to judgement of crimes affecting the financial interests of the Union. 
EJT bo neposredno odgovorno za preiskavo, pregon in obtožbo kaznivih dejanj, ki škodujejo finančnim interesom Unije.
In this respect, European Delegated Prosecutors, who will be equipped with the same powers as national prosecutors in addition to those following directly from the EPPO Regulation, will carry out the investigations hand in hand with national authorities, while the latter shall ensure that all instructions given by the European Delegated Prosecutors are followed. 
V okviru tega bodo evropski delegirani tožilci, ki bodo imeli enaka pooblastila kot nacionalni tožilci, poleg tistih, ki izhajajo neposredno iz uredbe o EJT, preiskave izvajali z roko v roki z nacionalnimi organi, hkrati pa bodo ti zagotavljali upoštevanje vseh navodil evropskih delegiranih tožilcev.
The EPPO Regulation contains also very specific obligations on Member States to provide European Delegated Prosecutors with the resources and equipment necessary to exercise their functions (Article 96(6)). 
Uredba o EJT vsebuje tudi zelo konkretne obveznosti držav članic, da evropskim delegiranim tožilcem zagotovijo potrebna sredstva in opremo za izvajanje njihovih funkcij (člen 96(6)).
In addition, OLAF, because of its very mandate in the area of PIF, is called on to become an important source of information to the EPPO. 
Poleg tega je urad OLAF glede na svoj mandat na področju zaščite finančnih interesov pozvan, naj postane pomemben vir informacij za EJT.
Union institutions and bodies may use OLAF for a preliminary verification of allegations in cases where they lack the expertise to assess whether certain information may need reporting to the EPPO. 
Institucije in organi Unije lahko organ OLAF uporabijo za predhodno preverjanje obtožb v zadevah, v katerih imajo premalo strokovnega znanja za oceno, ali je nekatere informacije morda treba sporočiti EJT.
Third bullet point: Article 24 of the EPPO Regulation clearly states that all institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union and the authorities of the Member States shall without undue delay report to the EPPO any criminal conduct in respect of which it could exercise its competence. 
Tretja točka: V členu 24 uredbe o EJT je jasno navedeno, da morajo vse institucije, organi, uradi in agencije Unije ter organi držav članic brez nepotrebnega odlašanja EJT poročati o vsakem kaznivem ravnanju, za katero bi lahko izvajalo svojo pristojnost.
It is the EPPO that will thereupon decide whether to exercise its competence by either initiating a criminal investigation or use its right of evocation. 
EJT se na podlagi tega odloči, ali bo na podlagi svoje pristojnosti bodisi uvedlo kazensko preiskavo bodisi uveljavilo pravico do prevzema zadeve.
The purpose of the preliminary evaluation mechanism is to allow IBOAs to make use of OLAF and its specialised expertise to assess information available to the IBOA and to provide the EPPO with good quality information. 
Namen mehanizma predhodne ocene je, da lahko institucije, organi, uradi in agencije uporabijo urad OLAF in njegovo specializirano strokovno znanje, da ocenijo informacije, ki jih imajo na voljo, ter EJT zagotovijo kakovostne informacije.
The Commission proposal for the revision of Regulation 883/2013 contains a specific provision on the preliminary evaluation by OLAF, including a strict deadline for its completion. 
Predlog Komisije za revizijo Uredbe št. 883/2013 vsebuje posebno določbo o predhodni oceni urada OLAF, vključno s strogim rokom za njeno dokončanje.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 130. 
SKLEPNE UGOTOVITVE IN PRIPOROČILA 130.
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 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;  Ongoing update of the Commission’s Anti-Fraud Strategy (CAFS). 
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 navedeni v nadaljevanju:  revizije kadrovskih predpisov za uradnike in druge uslužbence Evropske unije v letu 2013;  posodobljenega integriranega okvira kontrole in strokovnega pregleda tveganja goljufij v letu 2017;  Direktive (EU) 2017/1371 o boju proti goljufijam, ki škodijo finančnim interesom Unije, z uporabo kazenskega prava (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;  predlogov za programe porabe po letu 2020;  posodobitve strategije Komisije za boj proti goljufijam, ki je v teku.
Please see Commission's reply to paragraph 9. 
Glej odgovor Komisije na odstavek 9.
The legal constraints of the current irregularity reporting system and the complexity of the task have not been sufficiently reflected in the ECA report. 
V poročilu Evropskega računskega sodišča se ne upoštevajo dovolj pravne omejitve sedanjega sistema za prijavljanje nepravilnosti in zapletenost te naloge.
The Commission is aware of certain limits of its reporting system but has progressively and continuously worked to improve the irregularity reporting by Member States (see Commission's replies to paragraphs 24 and 25). 
Komisija se zaveda nekaterih omejitev svojega sistema prijavljanja, vendar si postopno in nenehno prizadeva, da bi države članice izboljšale prijavljanje nepravilnosti (glej odgovora Komisije na odstavka 24 in 25).
As the ECA itself indirectly acknowledges in paragraph 31, currently there is no other system (national or within the EU institutions) collecting data on fraud to the same level of detail as IMS. 
Kot Evropsko računsko sodišče posredno samo priznava v odstavku 31, za zdaj ni drugega sistema (nacionalnega ali v institucijah EU), ki bi podatke zbiral z enako stopnjo podrobnosti kot sistem za upravljanje nepravilnosti.
There is no cost-effective method to estimate undetected fraud reliable and defendable enough for evidence-based policy (see Commission's replies to paragraphs 14–16). 
Ne obstaja nobena stroškovno učinkovita metoda za oceno neodkritih goljufij, ki bi bila dovolj zanesljiva in utemeljena za z dokazi podprto politiko (glej odgovore Komisije na odstavke 14–16).
The methods mentioned by the ECA would not be well-suited in this specific context (see replies to paragraphs 33–37). 
Metode, ki jih navaja Evropsko računsko sodišče, v teh konkretnih okoliščinah ne bi bile primerne (glej odgovore na odstavke 33–37).
The Commission agrees that the analysis of fraud patterns and vulnerabilities should be a priority while taking into account that such studies are very resource-intensive. 25 
Komisija se strinja, da bi morala biti analiza vzorcev goljufij in ranljivih točk prednostna naloga, hkrati pa je treba upoštevati, da take študije zahtevajo zelo veliko sredstev. 25
The Commission considers that an identification of the motivation of fraudsters would not add significant value to its fight against fraud. 
Komisija meni, da opredelitev motivov goljufov ne bi imela bistvene dodane vrednosti v njenem boju proti goljufijam.
Furthermore, some of the causes highlighted in the report have already been targeted by legislative proposals such as the 2018 Financial Regulation or the relevant risks have been duly taken into consideration in the audit activity of the Management and Control Systems in shared management. 
Poleg tega so bili nekateri od razlogov, poudarjenih v poročilu, obravnavani že z zakonodajnimi predlogi, kot je finančna uredba iz leta 2018, ali pa so se zadevna tveganja ustrezno upoštevala pri revizijski dejavnosti sistemov upravljanja in nadzora pri deljenem upravljanju.
In the domain of public procurement, the EU has broadened and facilitated market access, in particular for SMEs, with the reform of the Public Procurement Directives in 2014 and further initiatives. 
EU je na področju javnega naročanja razširila in olajšala dostop do trga, zlasti za MSP, in sicer z reformo direktive o javnem naročanju leta 2014 in nadaljnjimi pobudami.
Those policy impulses, aiming at e.g. enhanced transparency, more digitalised processes and simplification, are also reflected in the new Financial Regulation and will contribute to reducing the risk of corruption. 
Tiste spodbude politike, katerih cilj so na primer večja preglednost, bolj digitalizirani postopki in poenostavitev, se upoštevajo tudi v novi finančni uredbi ter bodo prispevale k zmanjšanju tveganja korupcije.
Recommendation 1 – Gain better insight into the scale, nature and causes of fraud in EU spending The Commission partially accepts the recommendation. 
Priporočilo 1 – Bolje je treba prepoznavati obseg, naravo in vzroke goljufij pri porabi EU Komisija delno sprejema to priporočilo.
The Commission is committed to further improve the reporting of irregularities and fraud and the analysis of the nature of fraud 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 na podlagi prilagojenega zbiranja podatkov ter boljšega razumevanja splošnega okvira za boj proti goljufijam v različnih državah članicah.