natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
‘Reports’ (126) of drug law offences (use, possession,dealing, trafficking, etc.) reflect differences in nationallegislations, but also different ways in which the laws areapplied and enforced, and differences in the priorities andresources allocated by criminal justice agencies to specificcrimes.
“Poročila”(126) o kršitvah zakonov o drogah (uživanje,posedovanje, preprodaja, trgovanje itd.) odražajo razlikev nacionalnih zakonodajah, prav tako pa tudi različnenačine uporabe in uveljavljanja zakonov ter razlikevprioritetah in sredstvih, ki jih organi kazenskegapravosodja namenijo določenim kaznivim dejanjem.
In addition, information systems on drug lawoffences vary considerably between countries, especially inrelation to reporting and recording practices, i.e. what isrecorded and when and how. These differences makecomparisons between EU countries rather difficult.
Polegtega se kršitve zakonov o drogah od države do državemočno razlikujejo, predvsem kar zadeva postopkeprijavljanja in beleženja, tj. kaj se zabeleži, kdaj in kako.Zaradi teh razlik je primerjava med državami EU precejotežena.
)See DRCrime_Tbl 4 in the 2004 statistical bulletin.)The law to decriminalise drug use and possession for use was passed in November 2000 and came into effect in July 2001.)In the Netherlands ‘hard drugs’ are defined as drugs which pose unacceptable public health risks, such as heroin, cocaine, ecstasy and LSD.
Preostalekršitve zakonov o drogah se nanašajo samo na “uživanje drog”.)Glej Kazniva dejanja, povezana z drogami_Tab 4 v Statističnem biltenu 2004.)Zakon o dekriminalizaciji uživanja drog in posedovanja drog za uživanje je bil sprejet novembra 2000 in je začel veljati julija 2001.
Over the same period, the proportion of heroin-relatedoffences decreased in all EU countries from which data
V večini držav članic je konoplja tista prepovedanadroga, ki je najpogosteje predmet prijavljenih kršitevzakonov o drogah (Tabela 4).
28 were available (135), except Hungary and the United
V državah, kjer ta trditevdrži, predstavljajo s konopljo povezane kršitve od 34%(Švedska) do 87% (Francija) vseh kršitev zakonov odrogah.
Kingdom, where it increased (136), and Lithuania, where ithas fluctuated since 2000 (137).
Heroin je droga, ki se najpogosteje pojavlja v Litvi in Luksemburgu, kjer predstavlja 15% oziroma 51%vseh kršitev zakonov o drogah, medtem ko na Nizozemskem prevladujejo kazniva dejanja, ki vključujejo“trde droge”(133).
2 observed for cocaine-related offences, which as aproportion of all drug offences have increased since 1997in all countries providing data, except Germany, Lithuania,Luxembourg and Hungary, which reported downward
(2) (5)(1) voljo podatki(135), delež s heroinom povezanih kaznivih dejanj upadel, z izjemo Madžarske in Združenega
Norway n.a.
Norveška
cannabis is the most frequently reported illicit drug, withlifetime prevalence rates among inmates of between 11%and 86%. Prisoners’ lifetime prevalence of cocaine (andcrack) use is 5–57%and that of heroin 5–66%.
Nekatera kaznivadejanja vključujejo tako konopljo kot "trde droge" in tukaj nisovključena, kar pojasnjuje, zakaj je skupna vsota manj kot 100 %.Ta delež je vrednoten prenizko, saj predstavlja kazniva dejanjaza vsako posamično drogo, npr. izključno kazniva dejanja vzvezi s konopljo (ne vključuje kaznivih dejanj v zvezi s"konopljo + drugo(-imi) drogo(-ami)").Med osebami, ki jim je kazen določil tožilec po skrajšanempostopku ali ki jim je kazen izreklo sodišče.Nacionalne kontaktne točke.
)See DRCrime_Tbl 5 in the 2004 statistical bulletin.)The following countries provided breakdowns by drug of drug offences over time: Belgium, Germany, Spain, France, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg,
Veliko podatkov, ki so navoljo v EU, izvira iz priložnostnih študij na lokalni ravni,kitemeljijo na vzorcih zapornikov, katerih velikost inpogoji izbirnega postopka se močno razlikujejo.
Hungary, the Netherlands (only cannabis and ‘hard drugs’), Austria, Portugal, Slovenia, Sweden and the United Kingdom (until 2000 only).(136)Data for the United Kingdom were available until 2000 only.(137)See DRCrime_Tbl 6 in the 2004 statistical bulletin.(138)See DRCrime_Tbl 7 in the 2004 statistical bulletin.(139)See Prison_Tbl 1 in the 2004 statistical bulletin.
)Na Nizozemskem veljajo za “trde droge” heroin, kokain, amfetamini, ekstazi in LSD.)Glej Kazniva dejanja, povezana z drogami_Tab 5 v Statističnem biltenu 2004.)Naslednje države so podale časovne analize kršitev zakonov o drogah, razvrščene po drogah: Belgija, Nemčija, Španija, Francija, Irska, Italija,Litva, Luksemburg, Madžarska, Nizozemska (le za konopljo in “trde droge”), Avstrija, Portugalska, Slovenija, Švedska in Združeno kraljestvo (ledo leta 2000).)Podatki za Združeno kraljestvo so bili na voljo le do leta 2000.)Glej Kazniva dejanja, povezana z drogami_Tab 6 v Statističnem biltenu 2004.)Glej Kazniva dejanja, povezana z drogami_Tab 7 v Statističnem biltenu 2004.
kg406439InsideEN 18/10/04 15:55 Page 72
Letno poročilo 2004: O stanju na področju drog v Evropski uniji in na Norveškem
Annual report 2004: the state of the drugs problem in the European Union and Norway
Pred letom 2006 bo zdravstvena oskrbav vseh zaporih v Angliji, ki niso v zasebni lasti, postala del Nacionalne zdravstvene službe(142).
In the EU, the prevalence of regular drug use or dependence some studies have reported values as low as 1%or ashighas 69%.
življenju že zaužili drogo, od 22% do 86%(139). Tako kotmed prebivalstvom na splošno je konoplja najpogostejeprijavljena prepovedana droga, stopnja zapornikov, ki sojo v življenju že kdaj užili, se giblje med 11% in 86%.Stopnja zapornikov, ki so v življenju že kdaj zaužili kokain(in crack), je 5–57%, za heroin pa 5–66%.
Prisons: a challenge to public health
Zapori: izziv za javno zdravje
Where comparable data are available, they show thatyoung offenders are less likely to inject than adults and thatamong the prison population women are more likely to inject than men (143).
Kjer so na voljo primerljivi podatki, ti kažejo, da so mlajšiprestopniki manj nagnjeni k vbrizgavanju kot starejši in daso med zaporniki ženske bolj nagnjene k vbrizgavanju kot moški(143).
Based on several studies in the EU,
Na podlagi številnih študij v EU sta Bird in
Bird and Rotily (2002) have shown that around one third ofadult male prisoners are drug injectors. According toavailable data provided by the Reitox focal points, between
Rotily (2002) dokazala, da približno tretjina odraslihzapornikov moškega spola uživa drogo z vbrizgavanjem.Po razpoložljivih podatkih kontaktnih točk Reitox je med
0.2%and 34%of inmates (144) have injected drugs while
0,2% in 34% zapornikov(144) v zaporu užilo droge z
Although some prisoners may view incarceration as anopportunity to address their drug problems, this may bedifficult to achieve in practice (Long et al., 2004).
Nekateri zaporniki vidijo zapor kot možnost, da sespopadejo s svojim problemom, vendar je to mogočevpraksi težje doseči (Long et al., 2004).
Themajority of drug users reduce or stop their drug use onadmission to prison.
Vendar pa nekateri zaporniki nadaljujejosvoj vzorec uživanja drog, nekateri pa začnejo drogeuživati v zaporu.
However, some prisoners continue theirpattern of drug use and others start using drugs in prison.Studies available show that between 8%and 60%ofinmates report having used drugs while in prison, and10–36%report regular drug use (141).
Razpoložljive študije kažejo, da naj bimed 8% in 60% zapornikov med bivanjem v zaporuužilo droge, 10–36% pa jih poroča, da so droge rednouživali(141).
This raises issues of access to sterile injectionequipment and hygienic sharing practices among the prisonpopulation and the potential spread of infectious diseases ifthese matters are not addressed.
To sproža vprašanje glede dostopa dosterilne opreme za vbrizgavanje in higienskih navadizmenjavanja med populacijo zapornikov ter možnostiširjenja nalezljivih bolezni, če se teh vprašanj ne boobravnavalo.
Prisons are a highrisk setting for the spread of suchdiseases.
Zapori so okolja z visokim tveganjem za širjenje takšnihbolezni.
These problems aredifficult to overcome, as seen in Ireland, where, despiteefforts by prison authorities and healthcare staff to improveaccess to treatment and healthcare services for drug users,there is little evidence of improvement.
Prakse, za katere se je izkazalo, da lahkozmanjšajo pojav nalezljivih bolezni, so zdravljenje spolnoprenosljivih bolezni in oskrba s kondomi, nadomestnozdravljenje, programi cepljenja in programi za zamenjavoinjekcijskih igel in brizg za enkratno uporabo.
Substitution treatment is increasingly provided in prisons.
Mnogo zapornikov ima omejen dostop do zdravstvenihstoritev.
In Belgium, Denmark, Spain, Austria and Sloveniasubstitution treatment is available in all prisons. Belgium,Denmark, Luxembourg and Norway allow prisoners to startsubstitution treatment while incarcerated.
Zdravstveni strokovnjaki v zaporih imajo le malostikov z rednim zdravstvenim sistemom; poleg tegapogosto nimajo možnosti dostopa do nadaljnjegaizobraževanja, kar še pripomore k izolaciji zdravstvenihstoritev v zaporih.
In Italy initiationof substitution treatment usually targets remand prisoners.Prescriptions for progressively reducing substitutiontreatment until abstinence is achieved are available in most German Länder, the Netherlands, Slovenia and in prisonsserving larger cities in Italy. In the United Kingdommaintenance programmes are considered appropriatemainly for prisoners on remand or serving short sentences.
Reševanje teh problemov je težavno,kot se je pokazalo na Irskem, kjer kljub prizadevanjemvodstev zaporov in zdravstvenih delavcev za boljši dostopdo zdravljenja in zdravstvene oskrbe za uživalce drog niprišlo do bistvenih izboljšav.
It comprises threeconsecutive weekly injections with a booster after12months and results in 99%protection at 13 months(Zuckerman, 2003).
Vse bolj je navzoča težnja, da se odgovornost zazdravstvene storitve v zaporih prenese s kazenske službe nadržavni zdravstveni sistem.
In France, thisresponsibility was transferred to the Ministry of Health aslong ago as 1994.
V Franciji je bila tanaloga zaupana Ministrstvu za zdravje že leta 1994.
In Italy, local health services have beenresponsible for the care and treatment of inmates since2000.
Nadomestno zdravljenje je v zaporih vse bolj razširjeno.V Belgiji, na Danskem, v Španiji, Avstriji in Sloveniji jenadomestno zdravljenje na voljo vvseh zaporih.
In England and Wales, healthcare in prisons iswithin the remit of the Department of Health and the National Assembly for Wales respectively (in privatesectorprisons, it is within the remit of the Home Officeforboth regions).
V Belgiji,na Danskem, v Luksemburgu in na Norveškem smejozaporniki začeti nadomestno zdravljenje medprestajanjem kazni v zaporu.
Before 2006 healthcare in all non-privateprisons in England will become part of the National Health Service (142).
V Italiji pa naj binadomestno zdravljenje začeli zaporniki vpreiskovalnemzaporu.
Lifetime prevalence of injecting drug use among prisoners isgenerally reported to be between 15%and 50%; however,
Predpisana zdravila za progresivno zmanjševanjenadomestnega zdravljenja do dosežene abstinence so navoljo v večini nemških dežel (Länder), na Nizozemskem, v Sloveniji in v zaporih večjih mest v Italiji.
A review of 14 international studies examining theeffectiveness of needle and syringe exchange programmesin prison settings concluded that such programmes arefeasible and result in a reduction in both high-riskbehaviours and transmission of bloodborne viruses withoutany negative consequences such as accidental needlestickinjuries or deliberate use of needles as a weapon againstprison staff or other inmates (Dolan et al., 2003). During
V Združenemkraljestvu so vzdrževalni programi namenjeni predvsemzapornikom vpreiskovalnem zaporu ali tistim, ki prestajajokratke zaporne kazni.
)See Prison_Annex in the 2004 statistical bulletin.)See Prison_Tbl 3 in the 2004 statistical bulletin.)See Table 10 OL: More recent prison drugs strategies, ministerial directives and service standards in the EU and Norway.)See Prison_Tbl 2 in the 2004 statistical bulletin.)See Prison_Tbl 4 in the 2004 statistical bulletin.
)Glej Zapor_Tab 1 v Statističnem biltenu 2004.)Glej Zapor_Dodatek v Statističnem biltenu 2004.)Glej Zapor_Tab 3 v Statističnem biltenu 2004.)Glej Tabelo 10 OL: Najnovejše strategije v zvezi z drogami v zaporih, ministrske direktive in standardi storitev v EU in na Norveškem.)Glej Zapor_Tab 2 v Statističnem biltenu 2004.)Glej Zapor_Tab 4 v Statističnem biltenu 2004.
Chapter 8: Crime and prison issues
Poglavje 8: Vprašanja v zvezi s kriminalom in zapori
2002, needle and syringe exchange programmes wereimplemented in 27 penitentiary centres in Spain and12970 syringes were distributed with no incidentsreported.
V drugihdržavah EU, kjer velja kodeks civilnega prava, pa sodiščaza droge v strogem pomenu besede ne obstajajo, vendarso podobne pobude v razvoju.
In the German Land Baden-Wurttemberg, a project to dealwith juvenile offenders (Way out), similar to drug courts,was instituted in 2003 as a result of an alliance betweenpolice, public attorneys, judges, probation and drug adviceservices and key stakeholders of three court districts(Baudis, 2004).
V nemški deželi Baden-Wurttemberg so leta 2003 kotrezultat povezave med policijo, javnim tožilcem, sodniki,službami za pogojni odpust in službami za svetovanje vzvezi z drogami, ter med glavnimi udeleženci treh okrajnihsodišč (Baudis, 2004) začeli projekt za obravnavanjemladostnih prestopnikov (Way out –Izhod), ki je podobensodiščem za droge.
Similarly, in Milan, ‘The cure is worth theeffort’ is a programme involving the central court in closecollaboration with the local addiction and health services.Here, drug-addicted offenders are referred to treatment onthe same day that sentence is pronounced.
Podobno obstaja v Milanu program“Zdravljenje je vredno truda”, ki vključuje centralnosodišče ob tesnem sodelovanju lokalnih služb zaobravnavanje odvisnosti in zdravje. Tukaj prestopnike, kiso odvisni od drog, napotijo na zdravljenje isti dan, ko sejim izreče sodba.
The evaluation of the Dublin drug court (Farrell, 2002)concluded that that there were strong indications that thedrug court would result in cost savings to the criminal justicesystem over time.
Ovrednotenje sodišča za droge v Dublinu (Farell, 2002)je pokazalo, da bo sčasoma sodišče za droge zmanjšalostroške sistema kazenskega pravosodja.
The Ministry of Justice has extended thearea of Dublin over which the drug court has jurisdiction.
Ministrstvo zapravosodje je razširilo območje Dublina, na katerem jesodišče za droge pristojno.
Although in Spain an increasing number of prisons areproviding facilities for needle and syringe exchange, suchprogrammes have been discontinued in the German Länderof Hamburg and Lower Saxony (Stöver and Nelles, 2003).However, there is still a needle and syringe exchangeprogramme in one women’s prison in Germany (Berlin)(Weilandt, personal communication, 2004).
Čeprav v Španiji vse več zaporov zagotavlja prostore zazamenjavo injekcijskih igel in brizg za enkratno uporabo,pa so v nemških deželah Hamburg in Spodnja Saška teprograme opustili (Stöver in Nelles, 2003). Programzamenjave injekcijskih igel in brizg za enkratno uporabosicer še vedno poteka v enem ženskem zaporu v Nemčiji(Berlin) (Weilandt, osebno sporočilo, 2004).
In Josefstadt Prison, Vienna, a pilot project is in preparation, and in Luxembourg it is intended to provide injection equipmentfor drug addicts in prisons under the healthcareprogramme(145).
V zaporu Josefstadt na Dunaju je v pripravi pilotni projekt, v Luksemburgu pa imajo namen odvisnikom v zaporihvokviru programa zdravstvenega varstva zagotovitiopremo za vbrizgavanje(145).
A review of international drug court developments andtheireffectiveness carried out by the Pompidou Group in2003 concluded that the introduction of a therapeuticdrugcourt should be based on demonstrated need andrequires political support, mechanisms for inter-agencycooperation and appropriate structural/financial supportfor a guaranteed minimum period of five years(Moyle,2003).
Pregled mednarodnega razvoja sodišč za droge innjihove učinkovitosti, ki ga je leta 2003 izvedla Skupina Pompidou, kaže, da bi moralo uvajanje sodišč zaterapevtske droge temeljiti na izkazani potrebi in dapotrebuje politično podporo, mehanizme za sodelovanjemed službami ter ustrezno strukturno/finančno podporoza zagotovljeno minimalno obdobje petih let (Moyle,2003).
Alternatives to prison will be the subject of a selected issuein next year’s annual report, when a thorough and detailedoverview of such measures in the EU will be provided.
Alternative zapora bo obravnavalo letno poročilo zanaslednje leto, ko bo na voljo izčrpen in podrobenpregled takšnih ukrepov v EU.
Thisyear’s annual report will therefore deal with a specificaspect of alternative punishments for drug users.
Letošnje letno poročilo bozato obravnavalo posebne vidike alternativnih kazni zauživalce drog.
Emerging initiatives: drug courts and mediation between victim and offender
PojavljajoÏe se pobude: sodišÏa za droge terporavnava med žrtvijo in storilcem kaznivega dejanja
Restorative justice is increasingly used to accelerate penalproceedings against non-violent offenders (among whomdrug users are highly represented). This is in alignment withthe public interest by reducing the costs associated withdealing with petty crime cases in overburdened criminaljustice systems.
Za pospeševanje kazenskih postopkov proti nenasilnimprestopnikom (med katerimi je odstotek uživalcev drogzelo visok) se vedno bolj uporablja poravnalna pravica.To je v skladu z javnim interesom zmanjševanja stroškov,povezanih z obravnavanjem nepomembnih kazenskihprimerov v preobremenjenih sistemih kazenskegapravosodja.
One of the more significant developments isout-of-court mediation.
Eden od pomembnejših dosežkov jeizvensodna poravnava.
This system aims to resolve disputesbetween victims and offenders and to settle conflicts inconnection with penal proceedings.
Ta sistem je usmerjen v reševanjesporov med žrtvami in prestopniki ter v poravnavo sporov,povezanih s kazenskimi postopki.
In the Netherlands, the police offer first-time offendersbetween the ages of 12 and 18 the option of makingreparations for their crimes through mediation.
Sodišča za droge so nove strukture, ki so jih razvilivnekaterih državah zaradi obravnavanja uživalcev drog,ki so zagrešili nenasilen prestopek.
In the Czech Republic, a probation and mediation service wasestablished in 2000, with juveniles and drug users as keytargets.
Ta sodišča delujejotako, da odložijo izrek sodbe in vključijo v postopekosebe, ki običajno niso vključene v zdravljenje odvisnostiod drog (sodnik, tožilec, drugi uslužbenci organovpregona).
It recorded 29291 cases in 2002, 765 of whichinvolved drugrelated offences.
Namen je preprečiti vrnitev prestopnika v sistemkazenskega pravosodja in k uživanju drog s pomočjo
Drug courts are part of new structures developed in somecountries to deal with drug users who have committed anon-violent offence.
Na Nizozemskem ponudi policija možnost poravnaveprestopnikom, ki so zagrešili svoj prvi prestopek in so stariod 12 do 18 let.
The idea is to prevent the offender fromreturning to the criminal justice system and to drug use byvirtue of treatment and the pressure exerted by the criminaljustice system. Drug courts have been established in Irelandand Scotland, where penal systems are based on commonlaw.
V Češki republiki je bila leta 2000ustanovljena Služba za pogojni odpust in poravnavo, ki jenamenjena predvsem mladostnikom in uživalcem drog.Leta 2002 je ta služba zabeležila 29 291 primerov, odkaterih jih je bilo 765 udeleženih v prestopkih, povezanihz drogami.
)See Table 11 OL: Socio-health services targeting drug users in EU prisons in 2002.
)Glej Tabelo 11 OL: Socialno-zdravstvene službe za uživalce drog v zaporih EU v letu 2002.
Selectedissue 1Evaluation of ‘national drugs strategies’ in Europe
Izbrano poglavje 1Vrednotenje “nacionalnih strategij boja proti drogam” v Evropi
Approaches to measuring nationaldrugsstrategies usually provide information about the impacts of a strategyor provide answers as to why an activity does or does notachieve its objectives.
Pristopi k merjenju nacionalnihstrategijboja proti drogam ponavadi ne zagotovi informacij o vplivih strategijeoziroma ne postreže z odgovori, ali neka dejavnostdosega svoje cilje ali ne.
Although a monitoring system is oftenable to provide information on the evolution of the differentaspects of the drug phenomenon and on the measuresimplemented to combat it, it is generally unable todetermine whether or not those changes are the directconsequences of the implemented measures (causalityimputation).
Čeprav lahko sistem spremljanjapogosto zagotovi podatke o razvoju različnih vidikovpojava drog in o izvedenih ukrepih za boj proti temupojavu, je na splošno težko določiti, ali so navedenespremembe neposredne posledice izvedenih ukrepov(pripisovanje vzročnosti).
Many countries have recently adopted a ‘national drugsstrategy’ (146).
Veliko držav je nedavno sprejelo “nacionalno strategijoboja proti drogam”(146).
This section focuses on plans for theevaluation of these strategies, which for the first timehasbeen enabled on a European scale by workundertakenthis year by the national focal points.Thisworkhas helped to clarify references to evaluationin‘national drugs strategies’, which are not always self-explanatory or clear-cut.
To poglavje se osredotoča nanačrte za ovrednotenje tovrstnih strategij, kar je naevropski ravni prvič omogočeno z delom, ki so ga letosopravile nacionalne kontaktne točke.
The issue of causality and other complex scientific questionsare addressed through evaluation (Table 5), which means a‘judgment on the value of a public intervention’ (in this casea national drugs strategy) ‘with references to criteria’(relevance, efficiency, impact) ‘and explicit standards’(quality, quantity) (definition extracted from European Commission, 1999), and which, generally, requires indepth studies to be carried out.
To delo je pomagalorazjasniti sklicevanja na vrednotenje v “nacionalnihstrategijah boja proti drogam”, ki niso vedno samoumevnaali strogo razmejena.
Measures to evaluate European ‘national drugs strategies’can be divided into three main activities: (1) monitoring,meaning the routine collection of data regarding the drugphenomenon as well as responses and interventions;(2)evaluation of implementation, i.e. assessment of thevalue added by the implementation of initiatives and by theallocation of resources envisaged in the drugs strategy; and(3) evaluation of impact (generally called assessment ofeffectiveness), a judgment on the outcomes (short-termeffects) and the impacts (147) (long-term effects) on the drugsphenomenon brought about (at least in part) as a result of
Vprašanje vzročnosti in druga zapletena strokovnavprašanja se obravnavajo z vrednotenjem (Tabela 5),karpomeni “presojo vrednosti javne intervencije” (v temprimeru nacionalne strategije boja proti drogam)“ssklicevanji na merila” (ustreznost, učinkovitost, vpliv)“inizrecne standarde” (kakovost, količina) (opredelitev,povzeta po Evropski komisiji, 1999), kar na splošnozahteva poglobljene raziskave, ki jih je treba izvesti.Sestavni element vrednotenja je tako dvojen: (1) dokaz,kitemelji na podatkih dobre kakovosti, tj. zbranihzznanstvenimi metodologijami (spremljanje in poglobljene
Figure 23:Levels of evaluation in ‘national drugs strategies’ the national drugs strategy (Figure 23) (148
Slika 23: Ravni vrednotenja “nacionalnih strategij boja protidrogam”
Contextual factors
Kontekstualni dejavniki
The main distinction between countries in terms of theapproach taken to evaluate national drugs strategies isbetween countries that monitor the drugs strategy and thosethat envisage an evaluation of the implementation and/orimpact.
Glavna razlika med državami z vidika pristopa dovrednotenja nacionalnih strategij boja proti drogam jemed tistimi državami, ki spremljajo strategijo boja protidrogam, in tistimi, ki predvidevajo ovrednotenje izvajanjain/ali vpliva.
Monitoring What are the inputsand outputs?
Spremljanje Kaj so vložki in kaj rezultati?