natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
However, it does not make the important link between OLAF’s activity (number of cases closed in a year) and the ensuing results, both potential (e.g. amounts identified for recovery) and real (e.g. amounts actually recovered). 
Vendar v njem ni vzpostavljena pomembna povezava med dejavnostjo OLAF (število zaključenih primerov v enem letu) in njenimi potencialnimi (npr. ugotovljeni zneski za izterjavo) in dejanskimi (npr. dejansko izterjani zneski) rezultati.
28 TABLE 5 Internal Public Monthly reports Annual reports One-off reports Annual management plan monthly update Monthly management reports Annual activity report Annual operational report 2008 report concerning on-the-spot checks Ativity Number of investigations closed √ √ √ √ Potential results % of investigations closed with follow-up √ √ √ Amounts identified for recovery from investigations √ Stakeholder satisfaction1 Views of Commission DGs Real results Actual recovery resulting from investigations √ Actual recovery resulting from all cases √ √ AVAILABILITY OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 1 In 2007 OLAF launched a user satisfaction survey which was unsuccessful due to the low response rate (only six replies were received to the 45 questionnaires sent). 
28 TABELA 5 Notranje Javno Mesečna poročila Letna poročila Priložnostna poročila Mesečna posodobitev letnega načrta upravljanja Mesečna poročila o upravljanju Letno poročilo o dejavnostih Letno operativno poročilo Poročilo o pregledih na kraju samem iz leta 2008 Dejavnost Število zaključenih preiskav √ √ √ √ Potencialni rezultati % zaključenih preiskav z nadaljnjim ukrepanjem √ √ √ Zneski, ugotovljeni za izterjavo med preiskavami √ Zadovoljstvo zainteresiranih strani1 Mnenja generalnih direktoratov Komisije Dejanski rezultati Dejanske izterjave, ki izhajajo iz preiskav √ Dejanske izterjave, ki izhajajo iz vseh primerov √ √ RAZPOLOŽLJIVOST KAZALNIKOV USPEŠNOSTI 1 OLAF je leta 2007 izvedel anketo o zadovoljstvu uporabnikov, ki ni bila uspešna zaradi majhne odzivnosti (na 45 poslanih vprašalnikov je prejel samo 6 odgovorov). OLAF je uvedel operativne konference z generalnimi direktorati Komisije.
Source: OLAF reports. 
Vir: Poročila OLAF.
Relevant indicators are those which measure the link between OLAF’s investigations, its potential results (for example, funds identified for recovery, recommendations to open criminal proceedings) and its real results (for example, funds actually recovered, cases resulting in a penalty or sentence). 
Relevantni kazalniki so tisti, ki merijo povezavo med preiskavami OLAF, njegovimi potencialnimi (npr. ugotovljeni zneski za izterjavo, priporočila za sprožitev kazenskih postopkov) in dejanskimi rezultati (npr. dejansko izterjani zneski, primeri, po katerih pride do kazni ali obsodbe).
Although these are largely outside OLAF’s control, they do also depend on the quality and timeliness of OLAF’s investigations. 
Čeprav so ti v veliki meri zunaj nadzora OLAF, so odvisni tudi od kakovosti in pravočasnosti preiskav OLAF.
In order to be reliable, indicators should be based on accurate data and presented consistently in order to enable comparisons between years and across sectors (e.g. agriculture, customs, external aid) or types of investigation (internal, external, coordination and assistance). 
Če naj bodo kazalniki zanesljivi, bi morali temeljiti na točnih podatkih in biti dosledno predstavljeni, da bi omogočili primerjave med leti in po sektorjih (npr. kmetijstvo, carina, zunanja pomoč) ali vrstah preiskav (notranje, zunanje, usklajevanje in pomoč).
CMS contains information on financial, judicial and disciplinary results. 
CMS vsebuje informacije o finančnih, sodnih in disciplinskih rezultatih.
It also records cases closed without follow-up where OLAF has disproved, or been unable to prove, the initial allegations. 
V njem so evidentirani tudi primeri, ki so bili zaključeni brez nadaljnjega ukrepanja, kjer je OLAF ovrgel začetne obtožbe ali pa jih ni mogel dokazati.
The type of information which is available in the CMS and which could be reported annually is shown in Annex III. 
V Prilogi III so navedene vrste informacij, ki so na voljo v CMS in o katerih bi se lahko letno poročalo.
The indicators relate to three dimensions of OLAF outcomes: financial, judicial and outcomes by area or sector. 
Kazalniki se nanašajo na tri razsežnosti rezultatov OLAF: finančne, sodne in rezultate po področjih ali sektorjih.
For the financial and judicial outcomes, the tables outline the following: (a) activity (number of investigations closed); (b)potential results (investigations closed with follow-up, recommendations to recover funds or open criminal or disciplinary proceedings); (c) real results (actual amounts recovered or sentences passed). 
Za finančne in sodne rezultate je v tabelah poudarjeno naslednje: (a) dejavnost (število zaključenih preiskav); (b)potencialni rezultati (preiskave zaključene z nadaljnjim ukrepanjem, priporočila za izterjavo sredstev ali sprožitev kazenskih ali disciplinskih postopkov); (c) dejanski rezultati (dejansko izterjani zneski ali razglašene obsodbe).
The tables in Annex III complement information available in current reports. 
Tabele v Prilogi III dopolnjujejo informacije, ki so na voljo v sedanjih poročilih.
They link the real results to the year in which the cases were closed. 
Dejanske rezultate povezujejo z letom, v katerem so bili primeri zaključeni.
The information is presented to demonstrate ways in which indicators available in CMS may be reported, enabling reliable comparisons over time and between sectors and types of investigation. 
Informacije so predstavljene tako, da kažejo, na kakšne načine se lahko poroča o kazalnikih, ki so na voljo v CMS, kar omogoča zanesljive primerjave v času ter med sektorji in vrstami preiskav.
With additional analysis and explanation by OLAF, this information may provide a more complete picture of the activity trends and performance in its reports. 
Te informacije lahko z dodatno analizo in pojasnilom OLAF v njegovih poročilih nudijo popolnejšo sliko trendov in uspešnosti dejavnosti.
The Court followed up the recommendation of Special Report No 1/2005 to clarify the role of the Supervisory Committee. 
Sodišče je spremljalo ukrepanje po priporočilu o pojasnitvi vloge nadzornega odbora v Posebnem poročilu št.
UPDATING PROCEDURES NOT YET COMPLETED 59. 
POSODOBITEV POSTOPKOV ŠE NI KONČANA 59.
The recommendation of the Court, was to clarify the role of the Supervisory Committee to ensure that there was no interference in investigations (recommendation 16). 
Sodišče je priporočilo, naj se pojasni vloga nadzornega odbora, da se zagotovi, da ni vmešavanja v preiskave (priporočilo 16).
The Supervisory Committee revised its rules of procedure35 in 2006 and produced a number of reports and opinions concerning the management of OLAF with the aim of reinforcing the independence of the Office. 
Nadzorni odbor je leta 2006 prenovil svoj poslovnik35 ter pripravil številna poročila in mnenja o upravljanju OLAF, da bi se okrepila njegova neodvisnost.
However, a judgment of the Court of First Instance in July 200836 held that an important function of the Supervisory Committee was to protect the rights of persons who are the subject of OLAF investigations37. 
Vendar je bilo v sodbi Sodišča prve stopnje iz julija 200836 navedeno, da je pomembna naloga nadzornega odbora varovati pravice oseb, ki jih OLAF preiskuje37.
After the judgment was pro-nounced, a practical working arrangement had to be found to consult the Supervisory Committee before forwarding information to the national judicial authorities. 
Po razglasitvi sodbe je bilo treba vzpostaviti praktično delovno ureditev za posvetovanje z nadzornim odborom, preden se informacije pošljejo nacionalnim pravosodnim organom.
The new manual requires the information to be provided at least five working days before transmission38. 
Novi priročnik zahteva, da se informacije zagotovijo vsaj pet delovnih dni pred pošiljanjem38.
In June 2010 a new procedure has been agreed between OLAF and the Supervisory Committee to ensure that the letter transmitting cases to national judicial authorities is signed at least five working days after the note informing the Supervisory Committee about the envisaged transmission39. 
Junija 2010 sta se OLAF in nadzorni odbor dogovorila o novem postopku, da se zagotovi, da se pismo, s katerim se o primerih obvestijo nacionalni pravosodni organi, podpiše najmanj pet delovnih dni po obvestilu nadzornemu odboru39 o predvidenem pismu nacionalnim organom.
OLAF committed itself to take any advice of the Supervisory Committee into account and react on a case-by-case basis. 
OLAF se je zavezal, da bo upošteval vsak nasvet nadzornega odbora in se odzival v vsakem primeru posebej.
35 Rules of Procedure of the OLAF Supervisory Committee, 24 August 2006 (OJ L 33, 7.2.2007, p. 
35 Poslovnik nadzornega odbora OLAF, 24. avgusta 2006 (UL L 33, 7.2.2007, str.
36 Case T-48/05 of 8 July 2008. 
36 ZadevaT-48/05zdne8.julija 2008.
37 ThejudgmentoftheCourt further stipulates that ‘it cannot be disputed that the requirement to consult that committee before forwarding information to the national judicial authorities is intended to confer rights on the persons concerned’ (para 168). 
37 VsodbiSodiščajepolegtega navedeno, da „je neizpodbitno, da zahteva, da se pred posredovanjem informacij državnim pravosodnim organom posvetuje s tem odborom, daje pravice zadevnim osebam“ (točka 168).
38 OLAF Manual of Operational Procedures, 1 December 2009, Sections 3.3.6.1.1 and 3.4.3.2.1. 
38 PriročnikOLAFooperativnih postopkih, 1. december 2009, oddelka 3.3.6.1.1 in 3.4.3.2.1.
39 OLAF also provides the Committee with a summary note indicating whether the person concerned has been informed and been given the right to reply and whether the case is within the time limits set by the national authorities. 
39 OLAF nadzornemu odboru zagotovi tudi povzetek, v katerem navede, ali je bila zadevna oseba obveščena in je imela pravico do odgovora in ali je primer v časovnih rokih, ki jih določajo nacionalni organi.
However, in consideration of the decision of the Court of First Instance, this procedure puts at risk the rights of individuals concerned since it does not describe the steps to be taken in the event that the Supervisory Committee decides to issue an opinion. 
Vendar ob upoštevanju odločitve Sodišča prve stopnje ta postopek ogroža pravice zadevnih posameznikov, saj ni opisano, kakšen je postopek ravnanja v primeru, ko se nadzorni odbor odloči izdati mnenje.
The absence of binding procedures in this regard makes it more difficult to ascertain that the Supervisory Committee has not interfered with the conduct of investigations in progress. 
Ker ni zavezujočih postopkov za takšen primer, je težje ugotoviti, da se nadzorni odbor ni vmešaval v potek tekočih preiskav.
Furthermore, OLAF applies a policy of transmitting information to the national authorities without informing the Supervisory Committee where OLAF is aware that a case is already being dealt with by the national judicial authorities. 
Poleg tega OLAF izvaja politiko pošiljanja informacij nacionalnim organom, ne da bi o tem obvestil nadzorni odbor, kadar ve, da primer že obravnavajo nacionalni sodni organi.
In 2009 OLAF recorded nine such cases where information was transmitted to national authorities without informing the Supervisory Committee in contrast to the position of the Court of First Instance, whereby the obligation to inform the Supervisory Committee is ‘unconditional and leaves no margin of discretion’40. 
OLAF je leta 2009 zabeležil devet takšnih primerov, ko so bile informacije poslane nacionalnim organom brez vednosti nadzornega odbora, kar je v nasprotju s stališčem Sodišča prve stopnje, v skladu s katerim je obveščanje nadzornega odbora „brezpo-gojna dolžnost in ne dopušča nobene diskrecijske pravice“40.
The members of the Supervisory Committee are appointed by common accord of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission (see Article 11 of OLAF regulation). 
Člane nadzornega odbora soglasno imenujejo Evropski parlament, Svet in Komisija (glej člen 11 uredbe OLAF).
The term of office of the members of the Supervisory Committee is three years and is renewable once. 
Mandat članov nadzornega odbora traja tri leta in se lahko enkrat podaljša.
On expiry of their term of office, members shall remain in office until their appointments are renewed or until they are replaced. 
Po izteku mandata člani še naprej opravljajo svoje naloge, dokler njihov mandat ni podaljšan ali dokler niso zamenjani.
The members of the current Supervisory Committee took office on 30 November 2005. Their term of office expired on 29 November 2008. 
Mandat članov sedanjega nadzornega odbora se je začel 30. novembra 2005, iztekel pa se je 29. novembra 2008.
The Court notes that more than two years later, a decision to renew their term of office or to replace them is still pending. 
Sodišče opaža, da več kot dve leti pozneje odločitev o podaljšanju njihovega mandata ali o njihovi zamenjavi še vedno ni sprejeta.
Such a situation is unsatisfactory. 
Takšno stanje ni zadovoljivo.
40 The decision stipulates ‘that the Committee must be informed before the information is forwarded to the national judicial authorities’ (paragraph 164) and ‘that the obligation to inform the Supervisory Committee is unconditional and leaves no margin of discretion’ (paragraph 170). 31 Special Report No 2/2011 — Follow-up of special report no 1/2005 concerning the management of the European Anti-Fraud Office 
40 Sodba zahteva, „da ga mora o tem obvestiti pred posredovanjem“ (točka 164) in „da je obveščanje nadzornega odbora brezpogojna dolžnost in ne dopušča nobene diskrecijske pravice“ (točka 170). 31 Posebno poročilo št. 2/2011 – Nadaljnje ukrepanje po Posebnem poročilu št.
32 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REFOCUSING ON THE INVESTIGATIVE FUNCTION 66. 
32 ZAKLJUČKI IN PRIPOROČILA PONOVNA USMERITEV V PREISKOVALNO FUNKCIJO 66.
The Court’s previous report made six recommendations to refocus activities on OLAF’s investigative function. 
Sodišče je v svojem prejšnjem poročilu podalo šest priporočil za ponovno usmeritev dejavnosti v preiskovalno funkcijo OLAF.
Three of these recommendations, concerning the divestment or separation of activities (recommendations 2, 14 and 15), were not accepted, and the other three have been partially implemented (recommendations 7, 17 and 13). 
Tri od njih v zvezi z razbremenitvijo ali ločitvijo dejavnosti (priporočila 2, 14 in 15) niso bila sprejeta, preostala tri pa so bila delno izvedena (priporočila 7, 17 in 13).
Consequently, all six recommendations for OLAF to refocus on its investigative function are still valid. 
Zato je vseh šest priporočil o ponovni usmeritvi dejavnosti OLAF v njegovo preiskovalno funkcijo še vedno veljavnih.
In terms of the allocation of its resources, OLAF has not refocused on its investigative function. 
OLAF se pri dodeljevanju svojih virov ni ponovno usmeril v svojo preiskovalno funkcijo.
Consequently it did not accept the recommendations of the Court’s previous report to divest activities such as anti-fraud strategy and funding programmes. 
Zato ni sprejela priporočila iz prejšnjega poročila Sodišča, da se ga razbremeni dejavnosti, kot so strategija za boj proti goljufijam in programi financiranja.
The number of staff in investigation directorates as a proportion of all staff amounted to 34 % in January 2010. 
Januarja 2010 je bilo v preiskovalnih direktoratih zaposlenih 34 % vseh uslužbencev.
The Time Management System showed that the Office as a whole allocated 37 % of its time to casework in 2009 (see paragraphs 8 to 11). 
Sistem upravljanja časa kaže, da je OLAF kot celota v letu 2009 delu na primerih namenil 37 % svojega časa (glej odstavke 8 do 11).
When carrying out investigations, OLAF now makes more use of its investigative powers, for example to carry out on-the-spot checks and interviews. 
OLAF pri izvajanju preiskav zdaj v večji meri uporablja svoja preiskovalna pooblastila, na primer za opravljanje preiskav na kraju samem in razgovorov.
OLAF support services contribute to investigations where appropriate and in 2009 spent 25 % of their time in this way. 
Kjer je ustrezno, prispevajo k preiskavam tudi podporne službe OLAF, ki so v letu 2009 za to porabile 25 % svojega časa.
In this context, the strategic intelligence units identify areas of risk, but their work rarely triggers investigations (see paragraphs 12 to 18). 
V okviru tega enote za strateško obveščanje opredeljujejo področja tveganja, vendar njihovo delo redko sproži preiskave (glej odstavke 12 do 18).
FOLLOW-UP RECOMMENDATION 1 OLAF should increase the number and speed of investigations by increasing the proportion of time spent on its core investigative function. 
PRIPOROČILO ZA NADALJNJE UKREPANJE 1 OLAF bi moral povečati število in hitrost preiskav, tako da bi povečal delež časa, porabljenega za izvajanje njegove temeljne preiskovalne funkcije.
FOLLOW-UP RECOMMENDATION 2 The contribution the intelligence units make to investigative work should be enhanced. Special Report No 2/2011 — Follow-up of special report no 1/2005 concerning the management of the European Anti-Fraud Office 
PRIPOROČILO ZA NADALJNJE UKREPANJE 2 Prispevek enot za strateško obveščanje k preiskovalnemu delu bi bilo treba okrepiti. Posebno poročilo št. 2/2011 – Nadaljnje ukrepanje po Posebnem poročilu št.
IMPROVING THE EFFICIENCY OF INVESTIGATIONS 69. 
IZBOLJŠANJE UČINKOVITOSTI PREISKAV 69.
The Court’s previous report made eight recommendations to improve the efficiency of investigations (recommendations 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10 and 12). 
Sodišče je v svojem prejšnjem poročilu podalo osem priporočil za izboljšanje učinkovitosti preiskav (priporočila 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10 in 12).
Except for recommendations 3 and 12, the other recommendations are not yet fully implemented and therefore still valid. 
Ta, razen priporočil 3 in 12, še niso v celoti izvedena in zato še vedno veljajo.
The Court’s previous report made recommendations to ensure a clear procedural framework for investigations and to improve planning and supervision so that investigations were implemented in a timely and efficient manner. 
Sodišče je v prejšnjem poročilu priporočilo, naj se zagotovi jasen postopkovni okvir za preiskave ter izboljšata načrtovanje in nadzor, tako da bodo preiskave izvedene pravočasno in učinkovito.
OLAF has taken measures to clarify the procedural framework through the introduction of a new manual in December 2009 and a Practical Agreement for cooperation with Eurojust in 2008. 
OLAF je sprejel ukrepe za pojasnitev postopkovnega okvira z uvedbo novega priročnika decembra 2009 in praktičnega dogovora za sodelovanje z Eurojustom leta 2008.
Other measures taken by OLAF to improve efficiency were the introduction of a time management system, the development of a de minimis policy to focus on serious and complex cases, better use of CMS (though it is still not fully used), more focused training, a reduction in temporary staff, and splitting the Board into smaller groupings. 
Med ostalimi ukrepi, ki jih je OLAF sprejel za izboljšanje učinkovitosti, so bili uvedba sistema upravljanja časa, razvoj politike de minimis za osredotočanje na težje in zapletene primere, boljša uporaba CMS (čeprav se še vedno ne uporablja v celoti), bolj usmerjeno usposabljanje, zmanjšanje števila začasnih uslužbencev in razdelitev odbora v dve manjši skupini.
Despite the steps taken by OLAF to improve efficiency, progress has been slow and remains incomplete. 
Kljub temu, da je OLAF sprejel ukrepe za izboljšanje učinkovitosti, je bil napredek počasen in še ni v celoti dosežen.
The new manual was not introduced until December 2009 and the legal framework has not changed since the Court’s last report. 
Novi priročnik je bil uveden šele decembra 2009 in pravni okvir se od zadnjega poročila Sodišča ni spremenil.
Although OLAF entered into an agreement for cooperation with Eurojust, information on only one case was transmitted from OLAF to Eurojust in 2009. 
Čeprav je OLAF sprejel dogovor o sodelovanju z Eurojustom, mu je v letu 2009 posredoval podatke o samo enem primeru.
Although TMS is used to record time spent, the information it contains is not used to plan and supervise investigations. 
TMS se sicer uporablja za evidentiranje porabljenega časa, informacije v njem pa se ne uporabljajo za načrtovanje in nadziranje preiskav.
The volume of initial information to be assessed has increased considerably and the duration of these assessments has doubled. 
Obseg začetnih informacij, ki jih je treba oceniti, se je močno povečal in čas, potreben za pripravo njihovih ocen, se je podvojil.
The duration of investigations remains long, sometimes due to outside factors, but more generally due to internal factors such as other priorities or lack of resources (see paragraphs 19 to 44). 
Preiskave še vedno trajajo dolgo, včasih zaradi zunanjih dejavnikov, na splošno pa bolj zaradi notranjih dejavnikov, kot so druge prednostne naloge ali pomanjkanje virov (glej odstavke 19 do 44).
33 Special Report No 2/2011 — Follow-up of special report no 1/2005 concerning the management of the European Anti-Fraud Office 34 FOLLOW-UP RECOMMENDATION 3 The legal framework for combating fraud and irregularities should be revised to simplify and consolidate the anti-fraud legislation. 
1/2005 o upravljanju Evropskega urada za boj proti goljufijam (OLAF) 34 PRIPOROČILO ZA NADALJNJE UKREPANJE 3 Treba bi bilo pregledati pravni okvir za boj proti goljufijam in nepravilnostim, da se zakonodaja o boju proti goljufijam poenostavi in konsolidira.
Such an overhaul should address weaknesses in OLAF’s current powers and procedures, in particular concerning cooperation between OLAF and the competent services in Member States. 
Med takšnim pregledom bi bilo treba obravnavati slabosti v sedanjih pooblastilih in postopkih OLAF, zlasti v zvezi s sodelovanjem med OLAF in pristojnimi službami v državah članicah.
FOLLOW-UP RECOMMENDATION 4 OLAF should strengthen its cooperation and partnership with Eurojust, which, under Article 85 of the TFEU, is tasked with coordinating criminal investigations and prosecutions relating to offences against the financial interests of the Union. 
PRIPOROČILO ZA NADALJNJE UKREPANJE 4 OLAF bi moral okrepiti svoje sodelovanje in partnerstvo z Eurojustom, ki je po členu 85 PDEU odgovoren za usklajevanje kazenskih preiskav in pregonov, povezanih s kršitvami finančnih interesov Unije.
To this end, OLAF should put in place procedures to identify all relevant cases, communicate information on them to Eurojust on a timely basis, and report on the results of its cooperation with Eurojust on a regular basis. 
V ta namen bi moral OLAF vzpostaviti postopke za ugotavljanje vseh relevantnih primerov, Eurojustu pravočasno poslati informacije o njih in redno poročati o rezultatih svojega sodelovanja z Eurojustom.
FOLLOW-UP RECOMMENDATION 5 The provisional plans for investigations should include estimates of resources required and deadlines. 
PRIPOROČILO ZA NADALJNJE UKREPANJE 5 Začasni načrti preiskav bi morali vsebovati ocene potrebnih virov in roke.
These plans should be monitored and updated once investigative activities are underway. 
Ko začnejo potekati preiskovalne dejavnosti, bi se morali ti načrti spremljati in posodabljati.
Information from the Time Management System (TMS) should be used to provide more effective support to investigators and managers. 
Informacije iz sistema za upravljanje časa (TMS) bi se morale uporabljati za zagotavljanje učinkovitejše podpore preiskovalcem in upravljavcem.
FOLLOW-UP RECOMMENDATION 6 The overall duration of assessments and investigations should be better controlled to improve the impact of investigations and make better use of resources available. 
PRIPOROČILO ZA NADALJNJE UKREPANJE 6 Treba bi bilo bolje nadzirati trajanje priprave ocen in preiskav, da se izboljša učinek preiskav in bolje izkoristijo razpoložljivi viri.
To this end, the Board should play a role in monitoring long and complex investigations, to ensure appropriate action is taken. 
Zato bi moral imeti pri spremljanju dolgih in zapletenih preiskav svojo vlogo tudi odbor, da se zagotovi ustrezno ukrepanje.
REPORTING ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF INVESTIGATIONS 72. 
POROČANJE O USPEŠNOSTI PREISKAV 72.