natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
However, as mentioned in paragraphs 80 and 81, only a minority of staff claimed to have received ethics training or good-quality ethics guidance. 
Toda, kot je navedeno v odstavkih 80 in 81, le manjši del uslužbencev trdi, da so opravili usposabljanje o etiki ali prejeli kakovostne etične smernice.
83 While 59 % of staff consider that the ethical culture of their institution is high, and 51 % of staff consider that their institutions live up to their policies on ethics and integrity17, around 59 % of staff say that they do not know whether their institution deals appropriately with the ethical concerns reported. 
83 Medtem ko 59 % uslužbencev meni, da je etična kultura njihove institucije visoka, in 51 %, da njihova institucija uresničuje svoje politike na področju etike in integritete17, pa približno 59 % uslužbencev trdi, da ne vedo, ali njihova institucija ustrezno obravnava prijavljene etične pomisleke.
Those who have confidence (24 % of staff) in their institutions’ handling of ethical issues outnumber those who do not (17 % of staff) (see Figure 7). 
Tistih, ki zaupajo (24 % uslužbencev) v to, kako njihove institucije obravnavajo etična vprašanja, je več kot tistih, ki ne v to ne zaupajo (17 % uslužbencev) (glej sliko 7).
While around half would feel confident in reporting unethical conduct themselves, only around a third believe that those who report such issues are protected (see Figure 8). 
Medtem ko bi približno polovica brez težav prijavila neetično ravnanje, pa samo približno tretjina meni, da so tisti, ki takšne zadeve prijavijo, zaščiteni (glej sliko 8).
In both cases, one group of staff – the APAs – gave markedly more negative answers. 
V obeh primerih je ena skupina uslužbencev – akreditirani parlamentarni pomočniki – podala precej bolj negativne odgovore.
There may be a link between their lower level of perceived security in reporting ethical problems and the temporary nature of their employment contracts, combined with their dependence, in terms of career prospects, on their MEP. 
Dojemanje nižje stopnje varnosti pri prijavljanju etičnih težav bi bilo morda mogoče povezati z začasnostjo njihovih pogodb o zaposlitvi v kombinaciji z njihovo odvisnostjo od poslanca Evropskega parlamenta pri možnosti poklicnega napredovanja.
This also reinforces the observations made in paragraphs 54 to 56. 
To potrjuje tudi ugotovitve v odstavkih 54 do 56.
17 Answers to survey questions 11.9 and 11.10, see Annex II — Results of the survey. 
17 Odgovori na vprašanji 11.9 in 11.10, glej Prilogo II – Rezultati ankete.
Around 55 % of staff members claim to have heard of ways in which unethical behaviour can be reported but to have little knowledge of those ways. 
Približno 55 % uslužbencev trdi, da so slišali za možne načine prijave neetičnega vedenja, ampak o njih vedo le malo.
A further 14 % say they have not heard of any ways in which unethical behaviour can be reported (see Figure 9). 
Dodatnih 14 % jih pravi, da še niso slišali za možne načine prijavljanja neetičnega vedenja (glej sliko 9).
Conclusions and recommendations 86 Any unethical behaviour by staff and Members of EU institutions and bodies attracts high public interest and reduces trust in EU institutions. 
Zaključki in priporočila 86 Vsako neetično vedenje uslužbencev in članov ali poslancev institucij in organov EU pritegne velik interes javnosti in zmanjša zaupanje v institucije EU.
Any weakness in this respect may result in reputational damage to the image of the EU and its institutions. 
Vsaka slabost v zvezi s tem bi lahko škodovala ugledu podobe EU in njenih institucij.
Unethical behaviour is also linked with the risk of corruption and fraud (see paragraphs 06 and 07). 
Neetično vedenje je povezano tudi s tveganjem korupcije in goljufij (glej odstavka 06 in 07).
87 We concluded that, to a large extent, the audited institutions had put in place for staff and Members adequate ethical frameworks with room for improvement, consisting of legal requirements and procedures for enforcing them (including investigative and sanction mechanisms). 
87 Sodišče je prišlo do zaključka, da so revidirane institucije večinoma vzpostavile ustrezne etične okvire za uslužbence in člane ali poslance, ki zajemajo pravne zahteve in postopke za njihovo izvrševanje (vključno z mehanizmi za preiskave in sankcije), ki pa bi jih bilo mogoče še izboljšati.
We found that there is no common EU ethical framework governing the work of the representatives of Member States in the Council (see paragraphs 24 to 31). 
Ugotovilo je, da ni skupnega etičnega okvira EU, ki bi urejal delo predstavnikov držav članic v Svetu (glej odstavke 24 do 31).
88 We identified a number of weaknesses (not all of which are applicable to each of the audited institutions) with regard to strategies on ethics (see paragraphs 33 to 38), verification procedures, assessment criteria and guidance on the criteria for staff (see paragraphs 39 to 45), scrutiny of the Members’ declarations (see paragraphs 46 to 50), gifts and entertainment policies (see paragraphs 51 and 59), whistleblowing rules for APAs (see paragraphs 54 to 56), as well as post-employment provisions for MEPs (see paragraphs 57 to 63). 36 
88 Sodišče je odkrilo več slabosti (od katerih se vse ne nanašajo na vse revidirane institucije) zvezi s strategijami na področju etike (glej odstavke 33 do 38), postopki preverjanja, merili za ocenjevanje in smernicami o merilih za uslužbence (glej odstavke 39 do 45), pregledom izjav članov ali poslancev (glej odstavke 46 do 50), politikami glede daril in pogostitve (glej odstavka 51 in 59), pravili za prijavljanje nepravilnosti za akreditirane parlamentarne pomočnike (glej odstavke 54 do 56) ter določbami glede obdobja po prenehanju zaposlitve v institucijah EU za poslance Evropskega parlamenta (glej odstavke 57 do 63). 36
Recommendation 1 – Improve the ethical frameworks The audited institutions should address the above weaknesses in their ethical frameworks by: (1) developing overall strategies on ethics (Parliament and Council), (2) formalising procedures for checks on declarations and developing clearer guidance on the assessment criteria for staff (Parliament, Council and Commission), (3) enhancing the scrutiny of the Members’ declarations by establishing written standard procedures on checks on accuracy and completeness of information (Parliament and Commission), (4) increasing the clarity and coverage of the gifts and entertainment policies (Parliament (for staff), Council (for staff and the President of the European Council) and Commission (for Members)), (5) adapting the whistleblowing rules for APAs to reflect better the specific and dependent nature of their posts (Parliament), and (6) strengthening the post-mandate provisions for MEPs (Parliament). 
Priporočilo 1 – Izboljšanje etičnih okvirov Revidirane institucije naj navedene slabosti v svojih etičnih okvirih obravnavajo: (1) s pripravo splošne strategije na področju etike (Parlament in Svet); (2) s formalizacijo postopkov za preverjanje izjav in pripravo jasnejših smernic o merilih za ocenjevanje za uslužbence (Parlament, Svet in Komisija); (3) z okrepitvijo pregledov izjav članov ali poslancev z uvedbo standardnih pisnih postopkov za preverjanje točnosti in popolnosti informacij (Parlament in Komisija); (4) s povečanjem jasnosti politik in področja, ki ga pokrivajo, glede daril in pogostitve (Parlament (za uslužbence), Svet (za uslužbence in predsednika Evropskega sveta) in Komisija (za člane)); (5) s prilagoditvijo pravil o prijavljanju nepravilnosti za akreditirane parlamentarne pomočnike, tako da bodo bolje odražala posebno in odvisno naravo njihovih delovnih mest (Parlament); (6) z okrepitvijo določb glede obdobja po prenehanju mandata za poslance Evropskega parlamenta (Parlament). Časovni okvir: 2020.
Timeframe: 2020 89 The audited institutions have different ethical frameworks because the risks inherent in performing their duties are different in many areas. 
89 Revidirane institucije imajo različne etične okvire, ker se tveganja, povezana z opravljanjem njihovih dolžnosti, na številnih področjih razlikujejo.
However, there are areas where there are good reasons to have harmonised approaches to handling ethical issues among institutions. 
Vendar pa na nekaterih področjih obstajajo dobri razlogi za uskladitev pristopov k obravnavanju etičnih zadev med institucijami.
These areas include provisions governing gifts and entertainment policies, outside activities’ policies for staff and declarations in relation to the activities of Members’ spouses and partners’ (see paragraphs 64 to 68). 
Ta področja vključujejo določbe, ki urejajo politike glede daril in pogostitve, politike glede zunanjih dejavnosti za uslužbence in izjave v zvezi z dejavnostmi zakoncev in partnerjev članov ali poslancev (glej odstavke 64 do 68).
We also identified examples of good practice (see paragraphs 69 to 76). 37 
Sodišče je odkrilo tudi primer dobre prakse (glej odstavke 69 do 76). 37
Recommendation 2 – Work together to harmonise elements of the ethical framework and make further efforts to share good practice on ethical matters The audited institutions should work together to harmonise their ethical frameworks by focusing on: (1) their definitions of what constitutes a gift, and the maximum acceptable value of such gifts, (2) their ceilings for permitted remuneration of staff for outside activities, and (3) the information to be declared by the Members’ in respect to the interests of their family members, and activities of their spouses and partners. 
Priporočilo 2 – Sodelovanje za uskladitev elementov etičnih okvirov in nadaljnja prizadevanja za izmenjavo dobre prakse o etičnih zadevah Revidirane institucije naj sodelujejo za uskladitev svojih etičnih okvirov, pri čemer naj se osredotočijo na: (1) svoje opredelitve tega, kaj je darilo, in najvišje sprejemljive vrednosti takšnih daril; (2) svoje zgornje meje za dovoljena plačila uslužbencev za zunanje dejavnosti; (3) informacije, ki jih morajo prijaviti člani ali poslanci v zvezi z interesi svojih družinskih članov ter dejavnostmi zakoncev in partnerjev.
The audited institutions are encouraged, notably through inter-institutional forums, to make further efforts to share good practice. 
Revidirane institucije se zlasti v okviru medinstitucionalnih forumov spodbujajo k nadaljnjim prizadevanjem za izmenjavo dobrih praks.
Timeframe: 2020 90 An ethical framework can function well only if the people working for the organisation have the necessary skills and knowledge to apply it, and if they believe in the organisations’ commitment to ethics. 
Časovni okvir: leto 2020. 90 Etični okvir lahko dobro deluje le, če imajo ljudje, ki delajo v organizaciji, potrebne spretnosti in znanja za njegovo uporabo in če menijo, da je organizacija zavezana etiki.
The survey results present a mixed picture with regard to the staff members’ awareness and perception of ethical matters (see paragraphs 77 to 85). 
Rezultati ankete kažejo mešano sliko tega, kako dobro uslužbenci poznajo etične zadeve in kako jih dojemajo (glej odstavke 77 do 85).
We also noted the following: (1) most staff recognise unethical behaviour, (2) around half of the staff members assess their knowledge of the ethical framework as “good” or “very good”, (3) less than half of staff members stated that they had received training on ethics, (4) less than a third of staff members stated that the ethics guidance received from their institution was specific and based on real-life examples, (5) staff members who have received training on ethics and specific ethics guidance based on real-life examples are much more confident about their ethical competences, (6) the majority of staff do not know whether their institution handles ethics issues appropriately, 38 
Sodišče opozarja tudi na naslednje: (1) večina uslužbencev prepozna neetično vedenje; (2) približno polovica uslužbencev svoje znanje o etičnem okviru ocenjuje kot dobro ali zelo dobro; (3) manj kot polovica uslužbencev je navedla, da se je udeležila usposabljanje o etiki; (4) manj kot tretjina uslužbencev je navedla, da so bile etične smernice, ki so jih prejeli od svoje institucije, specifične in da so temeljile na resničnih primerih; (5) uslužbenci, ki so se udeležili usposabljanja o etiki in prejeli specifične etične smernice, ki so temeljile na resničnih primerih, veliko bolj zaupajo v svojo etično usposobljenost; (6) večina uslužbencev ne ve, ali njihova institucija ustrezno obravnava etične zadeve; (7) uslužbenci varnost pri prijavljanju etičnih zadev dojemajo kot nizko.
While around half of staff members would feel safe in reporting an ethics issue, only a third believe that those who report such issues are protected, and (8) almost 70 % of staff members have little or no knowledge about ways to report unethical conduct. 
Medtem ko bi se približno polovica uslužbencev pri prijavi etične zadeve počutila varno, pa samo približno tretjina meni, da so tisti, ki takšne zadeve prijavijo, zaščiteni; 38 (8) skoraj 70 % uslužbencev slabo pozna načine prijavljanja neetičnega ravnanja ali pa jih sploh ne pozna.
Recommendation 3 – Improve staff awareness and perception of the ethical framework and culture The audited institutions should improve their staff’s awareness and perception of their ethical framework and culture. 
Priporočilo 3 – Izboljšanje tega, kako dobro uslužbenci poznajo etični okvir in kulturo ter kako ju dojemajo Revidirane institucije naj izboljšajo to, kako dobro njihovi uslužbenci poznajo etični okvir in kulturo ter kako ju dojemajo.
The survey results suggest that this can be done by ensuring that training on ethics contains practical guidance based on real-life examples, and by improving the communication on ethics matters with staff. 
Rezultati raziskave kažejo, da je to mogoče doseči z zagotovitvijo, da usposabljanja o etiki vključujejo praktične smernice, ki temeljijo na resničnih primerih, in z izboljšanjem komuniciranja o etičnih zadevah z uslužbenci.
Particular attention should be paid to whether staff members know how to report any issues related to unethical behaviour, as well as to increasing their sense of security. 
Posebno pozornost bi bilo treba nameniti temu, ali uslužbenci vedo, kako prijaviti zadeve v zvezi z neetičnim vedenjem, in okrepitvi njihovega občutka varnosti. Časovni okvir: leto 2020.
Timeframe: 2020 This Report was adopted by the Court of Auditors in Luxembourg at its meeting of 4 July 2019. 
To poročilo je sprejelo Evropsko računsko sodišče v Luxembourgu na zasedanju 4. julija 2019.
For the Court of Auditors Klaus-Heiner Lehne President 39 
Za Evropsko računsko sodišče Klaus-Heiner Lehne Predsednik 39
Annexes Annex I — Main characteristics of the existing ethical frameworks Part A – Gifts and entertainment18 40 STAFF The Staff Regulations19 state that an official may not accept any favour, gift or payment from sources outside of the institution without the permission of the institution. 
Prilogi Priloga I – Glavne značilnosti obstoječih etičnih okvirov Del A – Darila in pogostitev18 40 USLUŽBENCI V kadrovskih predpisih19 je določeno, da uradnik brez dovoljenja institucije ne sme sprejeti nobenih uslug, daril ali plačil iz virov zunaj institucije.
Gifts in the form of money should not be accepted under any circumstances. 
Darila v obliki denarja se ne smejo sprejeti v nobenem primeru.
The audited institutions set thresholds to define acceptable gifts, and to determine in which cases permission may be presumed. 
Revidirane institucije določijo pragove, s katerimi opredelijo sprejemljiva darila in primere, v katerih se lahko domneva dovoljenje.
Council Parliament Commission Acceptable gifts with permission presumed Under €50 Under €100 Under €50 Acceptable gifts with prior permission required Between €50 and €150 Above €100 Between €50 and €150 Unacceptable gifts (to be refused) Above €150 Not Applicable Above €150 The permission is also presumed for items such as favours and/or invitations to lunches, dinners and receptions at which staff members participate in the interest of the service with the prior permission of their line manager or another appropriate authority. 
Svet Parlament Komisija Sprejemljiva darila z domnevnim dovoljenjem do 50 EUR do 100 EUR do 50 EUR Sprejemljiva darila s predhodnim dovoljenjem od 50 EUR do 150 EUR nad 100 EUR od 50 EUR do 150 EUR Nesprejemljiva darila (ki se zavrnejo) nad 150 EUR ni relevantno nad 150 EUR Dovoljenje se domneva tudi za stvari, kot so usluge in/ali povabila na kosila, večerje in sprejeme, katerih se uslužbenci udeležijo v interesu službe s predhodnim dovoljenjem svojega neposredno nadrejenega ali drugega ustreznega organa.
At the Council and the Commission, for official travel, the approved travel order or declaration of expenses is regarded as constituting permission to accept any offers of hospitality mentioned in the travel schedule. 
Za službena potovanja na Svetu in Komisiji odobren potni nalog ali prijava stroškov šteje za dovoljenje, da se lahko sprejme kakršna koli ponujena gostoljubnost, navedena v načrtu potovanja.
When staff members are prevented from refusing a gift, they may donate it (in case of the Commission, send it to their institution for donation) to a charitable organisation. 
Če uslužbenec ne more zavrniti darila, ga lahko donira (ali v primeru Komisije pošlje svoji instituciji, ki ga potem donira) dobrodelni organizaciji.
The institutions keep a register including all relevant information on 18 They are sums of money or any other physical objects offered without any payment in return or the possibility of participating free of charge in events that are accessible only in return of payment. 
Institucije vodijo 18 To so denarni zneski ali kakršni koli drugi fizični predmeti, ponujeni brez kakršnega koli plačila zanje, ali možnosti brezplačne udeležbe na prireditvah, ki so dostopne le s plačilom.
This includes offers of hospitality, including food, drink, meals and accommodation. 
To vključuje ponujeno gostoljubnost, vključno s hrano, pijačo, obroki in nastanitvijo.
19 For staff members who are not officials, similar requirements are set out in the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants (CEOS). 
19 Za uslužbence, ki niso uradniki, so podobne zahteve določene v Pogojih za zaposlitev drugih uslužbencev.
The institutions further detail these provisions by adopting more specific implementing rules. 
Institucije te določbe podrobneje opredelijo s sprejetjem bolj specifičnih izvedbenih pravil.
gifts and entertainment for which permission is required, and on gifts which are sent to the institution for donation. 
evidenco z vsemi ustreznimi informacijami o darilih in pogostitvah, za katere je potrebno dovoljenje, in o darilih, poslanih instituciji za doniranje.
Part B – Outside activities and assignments20 41 MEMBERS The codes of conduct for Members of the audited institutions regulate gifts and hospitality arrangements. 
Del B – Zunanje dejavnosti in naloge20 41 ČLANI ALI POSLANCI Kodeksi ravnanja revidiranih institucij za člane ali poslance urejajo ureditve glede daril in gostoljubnosti.
Gifts may be accepted if they do not exceed the threshold of €150 for the Commissioners and the Members of the European Parliament (MEPs). 
Darila se lahko sprejmejo, če njihova vrednost ne presega praga v višini 150 EUR, ki velja za komisarje in poslance Evropskega parlamenta.
In case of the President of the European Council, any gifts with a value over €150 become the property of the institution. 
Za predsednika Evropskega sveta je določeno, da vsako darilo v vrednosti več kot 150 EUR postane last institucije.
Members may use such gifts during their mandate. 
Člani ali poslanci lahko v obdobju mandata taka darila uporabljajo.
Gifts may be donated to charity, or stored and exhibited at the institutions. These keep a comprehensive public register (at the level of the Administration and/or the Presidency) on gifts received whose value exceeds the threshold. 
Darila se lahko donirajo v dobrodelne namene ali pa shranijo in razstavijo v institucijah, ki vodijo celovit javni register (na ravni uprave in/ali predsedstva) o prejetih darilih, katerih vrednost presega prag.
STAFF The Staff Regulations state that staff members must ask for permission from the institution before engaging in any outside activity, paid or unpaid, or before carrying out any assignment outside the Union. 
USLUŽBENCI V kadrovskih predpisih je določeno, da morajo uslužbenci institucijo zaprositi za dovoljenje pred začetkom opravljanja kakršne koli zunanje dejavnosti, ki je lahko plačana ali neplačana, ali pred izvedbo kakršne koli naloge zunaj Unije.
In the Parliament and Council, this permission should be granted for a maximum of one year, and may be renewed. 
Na Parlamentu in Svetu se to dovoljenje izda za največ eno leto in se lahko obnovi.
Members of staff must apply for such permission through their line managers. 
Uslužbenci morajo za dovoljenje zaprositi prek svojega neposredno nadrejenega.
The audited institutions have provisions setting out cases where the permission should be generally granted or refused. 
Revidirane institucije so z določbami določile primere, v katerih se dovoljenje na splošno izda ali zavrne.
Specific provisions apply to officials on leave on personal grounds, working part-time, elected or appointed to public office. 
Specifične določbe se uporabljajo za uradnike, ki so na dopustu iz osebnih razlogov, delajo s krajšim delovnim časom, ki so izvoljeni ali imenovani na javno funkcijo.
Activities or assignments to be granted Permission is usually granted for activities and assignments that: o do not give rise to an actual or potential conflict of interest (including impartiality and objectivity) with the duties of the staff member, o are not detrimental to, or incompatible with, the interests and reputation of the institution or the activities of the EU, o do not impair the staff member’s abilities to work for the institution, and o do not generate any revenue. 
Dejavnosti ali naloge, ki se odobrijo Dovoljenje se običajno izda za dejavnosti in naloge, ki: o ne privedejo do dejanskega ali potencialnega nasprotja interesov (vključno z nepristranskostjo in objektivnostjo) z dolžnostmi uslužbenca, o ne škodujejo interesom in ugledu institucije ali dejavnostim EU ali z njimi niso nezdružljive, o ne ovirajo sposobnosti uslužbenca za delo v instituciji, o ne ustvarjajo nobenih prihodkov.
20 These are activities or assignments, paid or unpaid, that officials or Members carry out outside the scope of their duties. 
20 To so dejavnosti ali naloge, ki so lahko plačane ali neplačane in jih uradniki ali člani ali poslanci opravljajo zunaj obsega svojih dolžnosti.
The term refers to activities of a professional nature, or those which go beyond what can be reasonably considered as leisure activities. 
Izraz se nanaša na poklicne dejavnosti ali tiste, ki presegajo to, kar je mogoče razumno šteti za prostočasne dejavnosti.
Part C – Conflicts of interests (CoI) upon recruitment, ad-hoc CoI and CoI in relation to spouse’s activities 21 In the case of the Commission, they are assessed on a case-by-case basis. 22 ibidem 42 Activities or assignments to be refused Permission is usually refused for activities and assignments that: o constitute regulated professions and are paid (such as architect, lawyer, accountant, interpreter/translator, doctor, etc.)21, o are pursued on the basis of an employment relationship with a third party with the exception of educational activities22, and o involve consultancy, advocacy or lobbying via-à-vis the EU or concern EU activities. 
Del C – Nasprotje interesov pri zaposlovanju, ad hoc nasprotje interesov in nasprotje interesov v zvezi z dejavnostmi zakonca 42 Dejavnosti ali naloge, ki se zavrnejo Dovoljenje se običajno zavrne za dejavnosti in naloge, ki: o pomenijo regulirane poklice in so plačane (kot so arhitekt, odvetnik, računovodja, tolmač/prevajalec, zdravnik itd.)21, o se izvajajo na podlagi delovnega razmerja s tretjo osebo, razen izobraževalnih dejavnosti22, o vključujejo svetovanje, zastopanje interesov ali lobiranje pri EU ali se nanašajo na dejavnosti EU.
The Council and the Commission set a certain threshold per year. 
Svet in Komisija sta določila letni prag.