natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Stabilisation and Association process (SAp) is a progressive partnership in which the EU offers a mixture of trade concessions (Autonomous Trade Measures), economic and financial assistance (CARDS Programme) and contractual relationships (Stabilisation and Association Agreements). 
Stabilizacijsko-pridružitveni proces je progresivno partnerstvo, v katerem EU ponuja splet trgovinskih koncesij (avto-nomni trgovinski ukrepi), gospodarske in finančne pomoči (program CARDS) ter pogodbenih razmerij (stabilizacijsko-pridružitveni sporazumi).
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 2666/2000 (OJ L 306, 7.12.2000, p. 
2666/2000 (UL L 306, 7.12.2000, str.
(2) In February 2003 the FRY was restructured into a State Union of two republics ÔSerbia and MontenegroŐ. 
(2) Februarja 2003 se je ZRJ preoblikovala v državno skupnost dveh republik „Srbije in Črne gore“.
The Constitutional Charter allowed, after three years, either republic to hold a referendum for their independence. 
Ustavna listina je obema republikama dovoljevala, da po treh letih lahko izvedeta referendum o neodvisnosti.
Montenegro held an independence referendum in the spring of 2006 in line with international standards. 
Črna gora je izvedla referendum o neodvisnosti spomladi leta 2006 v skladu z mednarodnimi standardi.
The vote for severing ties with Serbia exceeded the 55 % threshold, allowing Montenegro to formally declare its independence on 3 June 2006. 
Število glasov za prekinitev zveze s Srbijo je preseglo prag 55 odstotkov, kar je Črni gori omogočilo, da je 3. junija 2006 uradno razglasila neodvisnost.
Two days later, Serbia declared that it was the successor state to the union of Serbia and Montenegro. 
Dva dni pozneje je Srbija razglasila, da je država naslednica skupnosti Srbije in Črne gore.
(3) Throughout the report reference to Serbia therefore excludes the province of Kosovo. 
(3) Zato v celotnem poročilu izraz Srbija izključuje pokrajino Kosovo.
In the period from 2000 to 2006 the CARDS programme had a total budget of over 5 000 million euro, mainly for investment support and institution building. 
V obdobju 2000–2006 je znašal skupni proračun programa CARDS več kot 5 000 milijonov EUR in je bil namenjen predvsem naložbeni podpori in vzpostavljanju institucij.
The total population in the western Balkans region is around 24 million. 
Celotno prebivalstvo zahodnobalkanske regije šteje približno 24 milijonov ljudi.
Thus the CARDS allocation represents an annual support of 30 euro per capita demonstrating the political importance that the EU attaches to the region (4). 
Tako pomeni dodelitev programa CARDS letno podporo v znesku 30 EUR na prebivalca, kar kaže na politični pomen, ki ga EU pripisuje tej regiji (4).
6. are: (a) (b) (c) (d) The main areas of intervention of the CARDS programme reconstruction, democratic stabilisation, reconciliation and the return of refugees; institutional and legislative development, including harmonisation with European Union norms and approaches, the underpinning of democracy and the rule of law, human rights, civil society and the media, and the operation of a free market economy; sustainable economic and social development, including structural reform; promotion of closer relations and regional cooperation among countries and between them, the EU and the (then) candidate countries of central Europe. 
Glavna področja ukrepanja programa CARDS so: (a) obnova, demokratična stabilizacija, sprava in vrnitev beguncev; (b) institucionalni in zakonodajni razvoj, vključno z uskladitvijo z normami in pristopi Evropske unije, podpora demokracije in pravne države, človekovih pravic, civilne družbe in medijev ter delovanje prostega tržnega gospodarstva; (c) trajnosten gospodarski in socialni razvoj, vključno s strukturno reformo; (d) krepitev tesnejših odnosov in regionalnega sodelovanja znotraj držav in med državami, EU in (tedanjimi) državami kandidatkami iz Srednje Evrope.
CARDS programme, until early 2005, was the joint responsibility of the Directorate-General for External Relations (DG RELEX) and the EuropeAid Co-operation Office. 
V Evropski komisiji sta bila za upravljanje programa CARDS do začetka leta 2005 skupno odgovorna Generalni direktorat za zunanje odnose (GD RELEX) in Urad za sodelovanje EuropeAid.
DG RELEX had the responsibility for political relations and strategic development such as preparation of the country strategy papers and multiannual indicative programmes. 
GD RELEX je bil pristojen za politične odnose in strateški razvoj, recimo pripravo državnih strateških dokumentov in večletnih indikativnih programov.
The EuropeAid Co-operation Office was responsible for the management of the annual programmes. 
Urad za sodelovanje EuropeAid je bil pristojen za upravljanje letnih programov.
In early 2005 the Directorate-General for Enlargement (DG ELARG) took over the responsibility for the full project cycle from policy formulation and programming to the implementation. 
Na začetku leta 2005 je Generalni direktorat za širitev (GD ELARG) prevzel odgovornost za celoten projektni cikel od oblikovanja politike in načrtovanja programov do izvedbe.
AUDIT SCOPE AND APPROACH 8. 
OBSEG IN PRISTOP REVIZIJE 8.
The purpose of the European Court of Auditors audit was to assess on the effectiveness of the CommissionŐs management of the CARDS programme. 
Namen revizije, ki jo je izvedlo Evropsko računsko sodišče, je bil oceniti uspešnost Komisije pri upravljanju programa CARDS.
The main objectives of the audit were to conclude on the extent to which: (a) the strategic guidance directing the programme was appropriate and coherent; (b) the management approaches established and used by the Commission were appropriate and efficient; (4) By way of comparison the Tacis Regulation covering the same period as CARDS foresees an amount of less than 2 euro per capita per annum. In the European Commission the management of the 
Glavni cilji revizije so bili ugotoviti, v kolikšni meri: (a) so bile strateške smernice za vodenje programa primerne in dosledne; (b) so bili upravljavski pristopi, ki jih je vzpostavila in uporabljala Komisija, primerni in učinkoviti; (4) Za primerjavo, Uredba TACIS, ki zajema isto obdobje kot CARDS, na prebivalca letno predvideva znesek, nižji od 2 EUR.
C 285/6 EN Official Journal of the European Union 27.11.2007 (c) (d) the projects financed by the programme encouraged recipient country ownership; monitoring and evaluation were effective in identifying weaknesses and disseminating their findings, and the subsequent action taken by the Commission was timely. 
C 285/6 SL Uradni list Evropske unije 27.11.2007 (c) so projekti, ki so se financirali iz programa, spodbujali lastništvo držav prejemnic; (d) se je s spremljanjem in ocenjevanjem uspešno ugotavljalo pomanjkljivosti in širilo te ugotovitve ter v kolikšni meri so bili nadaljnji ukrepi Komisije pravočasni.
The Court assessed the extent to which the CARDS programme was governed by adequate strategic guidance and directed towards the specific need of the countries involved while being coherent with the regulatory-defined objectives of the programme and the SAp in its wider sense. 
Sodišče je ocenilo, v kolikšni meri so program CARDS urejale ustrezne strateške smernice ter v kolikšni meri je bil usmerjen v posebne potrebe vključenih držav in bil hkrati v skladu z regulativno določenimi cilji programa in stabilizacijsko-pridružitvenega procesa v širšem pomenu.
In accordance with the CARDS regulation the Commission defined a strategy framework for the western Balkan countries, with country strategy papers (CSPs) for each individual country, and a regional strategy paper, drafted taking into account all the recipient countries. 
V skladu z Uredbo CARDS je Komisija opredelila okvirno strategijo za zahodnobalkanske države, z državnimi strateškimi dokumenti za vsako posamezno državo in regionalnim strateškim dokumentom, sestavljenim ob upoštevanju vseh držav prejemnic.
As required by the regulatory framework the Commission has produced two multi-annual indicative programmes (MIPs), one for each country and one for the regional inter-state programme for the periods 2002 to 2004 and 2005 to 2006. 
V skladu z zahtevami regulativnega okvira je Komisija sestavila dva večletna indikativna programa, enega za vsako državo in enega za regionalni meddržavni program za obdobji 2002–2004 in 2005–2006.
In 2004 Ń at the end of the first MIP period Ń European partnership documents were approved by the European Council covering Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and Serbia and Montenegro including Kosovo (3), with the aim of intensifying the stabilisation and association process (4). 
Leta 2004, ob koncu prvega obdobja večletnega indikativnega programa, je Evropski svet odobril dokumente o evropskem partnerstvu, ki so vključevali Albanijo, Bosno in Herzegovino, Nekdanjo jugoslovansko republiko Makedonijo ter Srbijo in Črno goro, vključno s Kosovom (3), da bi se okrepil stabilizacijsko-pridružitveni proces (4).
The partnerships were drawn up for each country in the region and identified areas for action and obligations to be fulfilled by the partner countries in order to move them closer to the European Union. 
Za vsako državo iz regije so se sestavili dokumenti o partnerstvu in opredelila področja ukrepanja ter obveznosti, ki jih morajo izpolniti države partnerice za približanje Evropski uniji.
EU assistance was to be directed towards the priorities set out in the partnerships. 
Pomoč EU naj bi se usmerila v prednostne naloge, opredeljene v partnerstvih.
The audit revealed weaknesses in the strategic guidance of CARDS programming mechanisms. Strategies as described in Country Strategy Papers (CSPs), although formally compliant with the Commission CSP guidelines, were too broadly formulated to be useful for the programming exercise. 
Revizija je razkrila pomanjkljivosti strateških smernic za programske mehanizme CARDS. Čeprav so formalno skladne s smernicami Komisije za državne strateške dokumente, so strategije, kot so opisane v teh dokumentih, preveč splošne, da bi se lahko uporabile za načrtovanje programov.
CSPs were not updated to reflect major changes such as the CouncilŐs European partnership documents. 
Državni strateški dokumenti niso bili posodobljeni tako, da bi odražali pomembne spremembe, kot so dokumenti Sveta o evropskih partnerstvih.
The MIPs did not prioritise between and within sectors as required by Commission guidelines (5) nor indicated timing for the foreseen actions. 
V večletnih indikativnih programih niso bili prednostno razvrščeni sektorji niti določene prednostne naloge znotraj njih, kot to zahtevajo smernice Komisije (5), prav tako pa ni bila navedena časovna razporeditev predvidenih ukrepov.
The first European partnership in 2004 offered an opportunity for the Commission to focus its actions more precisely in the MIP covering 2005 to 2006 (6). 
Prvo evropsko partnerstvo leta 2004 je Komisiji dalo priložnost, da v večletnem indikativnem programu za obdobje 2005–2006 natančneje usmeri svoje ukrepe (6).
Even though the MIPs for 2005 to 2006 contained references to the European Partnership priorities, they still gave insufficient guidance for the selection of actions to be financed. 
Čeprav so večletni indikativni programi za obdobje 2005–2006 vsebovali sklicevanja na prednostne naloge evropskih partnerstev, niso zagotavljali zadovoljivih smernic za izbor ukrepov, ki naj bi se financirali.
(3) On the basis of Council Regulation (EC) No 533/2004(OJ L 86, 24.3.2004, p. 
533/2004 z dne 22. marca 2004 (UL L 86, 24.3.2004, str.
(4) The European Partnership for Croatia was approved by Council Decision 2004/648/EC (OJ L 297, 22.9.2004, p. 
(4) Evropsko partnerstvo s Hrvaško je bilo odobreno s Sklepom Sveta 2004/648/ES z dne 13. septembra 2004 (UL L 297, 22.9.2004, str.
(5) Reference made to point 3.1.4 of the guidelines for implementation of the common framework for country strategy papers. 
(5) Sklicevanje na točko 3.1.4 smernic za izvajanje skupnega okvira za državne strateške dokumente.
(6) Since becoming a candidate country in 2004, Croatia has benefited from the pre-accession instruments. 
(6) Odkar je Hrvaška leta 2004 postala država kandidatka, je bila upravičena do predpristopnih instrumentov.
A revision of the CARDS MIP for 2005 to 2006 was therefore not necessary. 
Revizija večletnega indikativnega programa CARDS za obdobje 2005–2006 zato ni bila potrebna.
27.11.2007 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 285/7 17. 
27.11.2007 SL Uradni list Evropske unije C 285/7 17.
As provided in the CARDS Regulation the CARDS Management Committee (1) was required to give its opinion on the CARDS programming guidelines, the Multi-annual Indicative Programmes and the Annual Programmes, with the intention of enhancing strategic guidance in the programming process. 
V skladu z Uredbo CARDS je moral upravni odbor programa CARDS (1) podati mnenje o smernicah za načrtovanje programov CARDS, večletnih indikativnih programih in letnih programih, da bi se izboljšale strateške smernice za načrtovanje programov.
In reality no evidence was found that the CommitteeŐs work contributed to improving the quality of the proposed documents. 
Dejansko se ni našlo nobenega dokaza, da je delo odbora prispevalo k izboljšanju kakovosti predlaganih dokumentov.
Detailed sectoral analyses by the Commission and/or recipient country national strategies mostly did not exist or were produced too late to enhance the strategic guidance. 
Podrobnih sektorskih analiz, ki bi jih opravila Komisija, in/ali nacionalnih strategij držav prejemnic v glavnem ni bilo ali pa so bile izdelane prepozno, da bi izboljšale strateške smernice.
As a result, projects were not selected on the basis of objective criteria and, in certain cases, they were selected in response to the beneficiariesŐ ad hoc request. 
Zato projekti niso bili izbrani na podlagi objektivnih meril, v nekaterih primerih pa so bili izbrani kot odgovor na ad hoc prošnjo upravičencev.
Although the identification process was complex, it did not involve a clear methodology for optimising project selection. 
Čeprav je bil postopek določitve projektov zapleten, ni vključeval jasne metodologije za izbor najboljših projektov.
For instance, there was no cost-benefit analysis (2) or other comparative analysis of possible alternative projects before selecting the projects. 
Pred izbiro projektov se na primer ni opravila analiza stroškov in koristi (2) niti nobena druga primerjalna analiza možnih drugih projektov.
Some projects were simply continuations of earlier support. 
Nekateri projekti so bili enostavno nadaljevanje predhodne podpore.
There were no guidelines to help decide which intervention would best support the stabilisation and association process. 
Ni bilo smernic, ki bi pomagale določiti, kateri ukrep bi najbolje podprl stabilizacijsko-pridružitveni proces.
The audit identified differences between the planned and implemented projects. 
Pri reviziji so bile ugotovljene razlike med načrtovanimi in izvedenimi projekti.
There were essential projects not implemented due to the resistance of the recipient country or projects for which the initial plans were disregarded (Box 1). 
Nekateri bistveni projekti se niso izvedli zaradi nasprotovanja države prejemnice, pri nekaterih projektih pa se začetni načrti niso upoštevali (okvir 1).
Box 1 Examples of non-implemented projects Case 1: No political support to the Serbian Supreme Audit Institution (SAI) As early as 2001 the EAR had identified the necessary building blocks for significant government institutional reform in Serbia, including support to the treasury, the internal audit function as well as a project concerning the creation of a Supreme Audit Institution. 
Okvir 1 Primeri neizvedenih projektov Primer 1: Srbska vrhovna revizijska institucija (VRI) ni imela politične podpore Že leta 2001 je Evropska agencija za obnovo opredelila elemente, potrebne za pomembno institucionalno reformo vlade v Srbiji, vključno s podporo državni blagajni, funkciji notranje revizije in projektu vzpostavitve vrhovne revizijske institucije.
However, the necessary backing of the Serbian Parliament did not materialise for the SAI and the project was not taken forward until the 2006 programme. 
VRI ni dobila potrebne podpore srbskega parlamenta in projekt se ni nadaljeval vse do programa za leto 2006.
(1) The CARDS Management Committee is composed of the representations of the Member States and chaired by the Commission. 
(1) Upravni odbor programa CARDS sestavljajo predstavniki držav članic, predseduje pa mu Komisija.
(2) Cost-benefit analysis allows a measure of the economic efficiency of the programme or project, as well as providing a basis for comparison with alternatives. 
(2) Analiza stroškov in koristi omogoča merjenje gospodarske učinkovitosti programa ali projekta in zagotavlja podlago za primerjavo z drugimi možnostmi.
Case 2: The European Commission Police Assistance mission in Albania The project fiche of the Justice and Home Affairs sector in Albania for the programming year 2002 envisaged for the Police and Public Order component Ôto contribute to the establishment of rule of law and to the establishment of a functioning police force able to contribute to democratic stabilityŐ. 
Primer 2: Policijska misija Evropske komisije za pomoč Albaniji V projektnem predlogu za sektor za pravosodje in notranje zadeve v Albaniji je bilo za programsko leto 2002 predvideno, da bo komponenta policije in javnega reda prispevala k vzpostavitvi pravne države in uveljavitvi delujoče policije, ki bo lahko prispevala k demokratični stabilnosti.
It established the following: ÔThe project will be executed through supporting the EC Police Assistance Mission (ECPA), training and related investment supportŐ. 
Predlog je določil, da se bo projekt izvedel s podporo policijski misiji Evropske komisije za pomoč v Albaniji (ECPA), usposabljanju in s tem povezani naložbeni podpori.
Out of the 8 million euro allocated to the Police and Public order component, 4 million euro were planned for institution building support (financing ECPA mission), 2,5 million euro for training and support component and 1,5 million euro for the investment component. 
Od 8 milijonov EUR, dodeljenih komponenti policije in javnega reda, so bili 4 milijoni EUR predvideni za podporo vzpostavljanju institucij (financiranje misije ECPA), 2,5 milijona EUR za komponento usposabljanja in podpore ter 1,5 milijona EUR za komponento naložb.
In reality the project fiche was completely disregarded. 
Projektni predlog se dejansko sploh ni upošteval.
Not one euro was spent in order to finance the ECPA mission. 
Niti euro ni bil porabljen za financiranje misije ECPA.
4,7 million euro were spent on a Data Communication Network, 1,9 million euro were spent on the power supply equipment and 1 million euro were spent on a grant to the United Nations in order to support the Security Sector Reform programme. 
Za omrežje podatkovne komunikacije je bilo porabljenih 4,7 milijona EUR, za opremo za oskrbo z električno energijo 1,9 milijona EUR, 1 milijon EUR pa je bil dodeljen Združenim narodom za podporo programa reforme varnostnega sektorja.
Because the recipient countries were recovering from war the early years of the CARDS programme focused more on reconstruction (through investment projects) than institution building. 
Ker so si države prejemnice skušale opomoči po vojni, je bil v prvih letih program CARDS usmerjen bolj v obnovo (prek naložbenih projektov) kot v vzpostavljanje institucij.
However, as the programme matured a shift towards more institution building was required. 
Z dozorevanjem programa pa je bila potrebna preusmeritev k večjemu vzpostavljanju institucij.
In its report on the European Agency for Reconstruction (EAR) published in May 2002, the European Parliament considered that the EAR should significantly increase EU assistance in the two countries (i.e. the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) in favour of institution building. 
Evropski parlament je v svojem poročilu o Evropski agenciji za obnovo, ki je bilo objavljeno maja 2002, menil, da bi Evropska agencija za obnovo morala bistveno povečati pomoč EU za vzpostavljanje institucij v dveh državah (tj. v Zvezni republiki Jugoslaviji in Nekdanji jugoslovanski republiki Makedoniji).
The Court analysed the CARDS projects in order to determine and assess the proportion of institution building projects compared with investment projects (see Graph 1). 
Sodišče je analiziralo projekte CARDS, da bi določilo in ocenilo delež projektov za vzpostavljanje institucij v primerjavi z naložbenimi projekti (glej grafični prikaz 1).
C 285/8 EN Official Journal of the European Union Graph 1 Proportion of institution building projects in Delegations and in the EAR by programming year (1) 27.11.2007 100 % 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 % 50 % 40 % 30 % 20 % 10 % 0% 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 YEAR (1) Projects of each programming year n are implemented in the year n and the following years. 
C 285/8 SL Uradni list Evropske unije 27.11.2007 Grafični prikaz 1 Delež projektov za vzpostavljanje institucij v delegacijah in Evropski agenciji za obnovo po programskih letih (1) 100 % 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 % 50 % 40 % 30 % 20 % 10 % 0% 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LETO DEL EAR (1) Projekti v vsakem programskem letu n se izvajajo v letu n in naslednjih letih.
In general between 2001 and 2005 the emphasis on institution building projects increased. 
Med letoma 2001 in 2005 je bil poudarek na vzpostavljanju institucij na splošno vse večji.
From the very beginning the focus on institution building was more pronounced in countries where assistance was managed by the Delegations (1) than in countries where it was managed by the EAR (2). 
Že od samega začetka je bila osredotočenost na vzpostavljanje institucij bolj izražena v državah, v katerih so pomoč upravljale delegacije (1), kot v državah, v katerih jo je upravljala Evropska agencija za obnovo (2).
When strengthening the administrative capacity of a country, twinning is recognised as an important instrument (3). 
Pri krepitvi upravnih zmogljivosti države se kot pomemben instrument priznava twinning (3).
However, twinning had a slow start in the western Balkans particularly in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia where the EAR only started to use twinning in 2005. 
Twinning se je na zahodnem Balkanu začel počasi, zlasti v Nekdanji jugoslovanski republiki Makedoniji, kjer ga je Evropska agencija za obnovo začela uporabljati šele leta 2005.
An EAR evaluation of twinning (4) concluded that there was sometimes only limited support from the AgencyŐs Programme Managers for twinning and that EAR staff were not always trained sufficiently in the use of that instrument. 
V svoji oceni twinninga (4) je Evropska agencija za obnovo ugotovila, da je bila podpora s strani vodij programov twinninga iz Agencije včasih omejena in da osebje Agencije za obnovo ni bilo vedno zadovoljivo usposobljeno za uporabo tega instrumenta.
(1) The EC Delegations are implementing CARDS programmes in Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Croatia. 
(1) Delegacije Evropske komisije izvajajo programe CARDS v Albaniji, Bosni in Hercegovini ter na Hrvaškem.
(2) The EAR has operational centres in former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Kosovo, Montenegro and Serbia. 
(2) Evropska agencija za obnovo ima operativne centre v Nekdanji jugoslovanski republiki Makedoniji, na Kosovem, v Črni gori in Srbiji.
(3) The Commission launched twinning as the principal tool of pre-accession assistance for institution building already in May 1998. 
(3) Komisija je že maja 1998 uvedla twinning kot glavno orodje predpristopne pomoči za vzpostavljanje institucij.
The Thessaloniki Summit, in June 2003 underlined the significance of twinning in the western Balkans. 
Vrh v Solunu junija 2003 je poudaril pomen twinninga na zahodnem Balkanu.
(4) Reference made to EAR evaluation EU/13/040/05 of November 2005. 26. 
(4) Sklicevanje na oceno Evropske agencije za obnovo EU/13/040/05 iz novembra 2005.