natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
13 Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national (the “Dublin II regulation”). 27 
27 13 Rdets frordning (EG) nr 343/2003 av den 18 februari 2003 om kriterier och mekanismer fr att avgra vilken medlemsstat som har ansvaret fr att prva en asylanskan som en medborgare i tredje land har gett in i ngon medlemsstat (Dublin II-frordningen).
Passenger Name Record 57 PNR is a new system. 
Passageraruppgifter 57 PNR r ett nytt system.
While the Member States share a common legal basis for its implementation, their ability to use the system to exchange information remains limited, as explained in paragraph 28. 
Medlemsstaterna har en gemensam rttslig grund fr att genomfra systemet, men deras mjlighet att anvnda det fr att utbyta information r fortfarande begrnsad, ssom frklaras i punkt 28.
Eurosur 58 The use of Eurosur is very uneven between Member States. 
Eurosur 58 Anvndningen av Eurosur varierar i hg grad mellan medlemsstaterna.
Between 2013 and 2017, over 140 000 incidents were recorded in Eurosur. 
Mellan 2013 och 2017 registrerades ver 140 000 incidenter i Eurosur.
However, numerous participating countries did not record a significant number of incidents14. Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Germany, Denmark, France, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden and Slovenia recorded below 5 000 incidents each, while Hungary, the most active country, registered over 25 000. 
Det var dock mnga deltagande lnder som inte registrerade ett stort antal incidenter14. sterrike, Belgien, Cypern, Tjeckien, Tyskland, Danmark, Frankrike, Litauen, Luxemburg, Malta, Nederlnderna, Portugal, Sverige och Slovenien registrerade under 5 000 incidenter var, medan Ungern, det mest aktiva landet, registrerade ver 25 000.
The type of information that Member States share also varies. 
Den typ av information som medlemsstaterna delar skiljer sig ocks t.
For example Finland has chosen to share all the information from its national situational picture, both compulsory and optional, while Poland and France only enter compulsory information. 
Till exempel har Finland valt att dela all information frn den nationella situationsbilden, bde obligatorisk och frivillig, medan Polen och Frankrike enbart fr in obligatorisk information.
VIS 59 The Schengen States have a common visa policy. 
VIS 59 Schengenstaterna har en gemensam viseringspolitik.
They can issue common short-stay visas that allow the holder to stay for up to 90 days in any of the 26 Schengen countries. In 2018, the Schengen States issued over 14 million short-stay Schengen visas15. 
De kan utfrda viseringar fr kortare vistelse som tillter innehavaren att uppehlla sig upp till 90 dagar i de 26 Schengenlnderna. r 2018 utfrdade Schengenstaterna ver 14 miljoner Schengenviseringar fr kortare vistelse15.
60 The system makes it possible to verify the identity of a Schengen visa holder anywhere within the Schengen area. 
60 Systemet gr det mjligt att kontrollera identiteten hos en innehavare av en Schengenvisering var som helst i Schengenomrdet.
A Schengen visa holder may cross the area’s external borders multiple times and may do so in different Schengen States. 
En innehavare av en Schengenvisering fr passera omrdets yttre grnser flera gnger och kan gra det i olika Schengenstater.
12 million visas issued in that period. 
Under de frsta nio mnaderna 2017 utfrdes 35 miljoner viseringskontroller vid grnserna, jmfrt med tolv miljoner viseringar som utfrdades under den perioden.
The number of checks carried out varies significantly between the Schengen States. 
Antalet kontroller som genomfrs varierar stort mellan Schengenstaterna.
61 We found that between October 2015 and September 2017, the five countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Greece) that issued the highest number of visas performed fewer visa checks at their borders than the number of visas issued. 
61 Vi konstaterade att de fem lnder (Frankrike, Tyskland, Italien, Spanien och Grekland) som utfrdade det strsta antalet viseringar utfrde frre viseringskontroller vid grnserna n det antal viseringar som hade utfrdats mellan oktober 2015 och september 2017.
For a combined total of nearly 18 million visas issued these countries conducted fewer than 14 million checks. 
Dessa lnder utfrdade totalt nstan 18 miljoner viseringar men genomfrde frre n 14 miljoner kontroller.
62 In theory, this could be because a significant number of travellers with visas issued by those countries entered the Schengen area via another country, or deferred or cancelled their journeys. 
62 I teorin skulle detta kunna bero p att ett stort antal resenrer med viseringar som utfrdats av dessa lnder reste in i Schengenomrdet via ett annat land eller skt upp eller stllde in resan.
However, given that most travellers are likely to apply for a visa from the country they intend to enter, and that a Schengen visa costs money16, it could indicate that visas are not systematically checked at all border checkpoints. 
Med tanke p att det r sannolikt att de flesta resenrer ansker om visering frn det land som de har fr avsikt att resa in i, och att en Schengenvisering kostar pengar16, skulle detta dock kunna tyda p att viseringar inte kontrolleras systematiskt vid alla grnsvergngar.
Information was not complete in some of the systems 63 The quality of the data in the information systems is of the utmost importance. 
Informationen var inte fullstndig i vissa system 63 Det r av yttersta vikt att uppgifterna i informationssystemen r av god kvalitet.
Entering data in the system is the responsibility of judicial and law enforcement authorities, as well as Member States’ national border authorities. 
Det r de rttsliga och brottsbekmpande myndigheterna, liksom medlemsstaternas nationella grnsmyndigheter, som br ansvaret fr att mata in uppgifter i systemen.
The border guards use this data as their basis for making decisions that affect the safety of European citizens. 64 In accordance with EU legislation, the responsibility for data quality lies with the Member States. 
Grnskontrolltjnstemnnen anvnder uppgifterna som grund fr att fatta beslut som pverkar de europeiska medborgarnas skerhet. 64 Enligt EU:s lagstiftning r det medlemsstaterna som ansvarar fr uppgifternas kvalitet.
Therefore we found little reference to data quality control procedures at EU level. 
Drfr fann vi f hnvisningar till frfaranden fr kontroll av uppgiftskvaliteten p EU-niv.
Only the Eurodac regulation laid the foundation for a fingerprint quality control framework by making eu-LISA responsible for setting quality standards. 
Enbart Eurodac-frordningen lade grunden fr en ram fr kvalitetskontroll av fingeravtryck genom att ge eu-Lisa ansvaret fr att faststlla kvalitetsnormer.
65 The SIS II regulation did not involve the Commission or eu-LISA in the data quality process. 
65 I SIS II-frordningen gjordes varken kommissionen eller eu-Lisa delaktiga i frfarandet nr det gller uppgifters kvalitet.
Instead, it made Member States responsible for the accuracy, timeliness and relevance of the data in the system17. 
I stllet lades ansvaret fr att uppgifterna i systemet r korrekta, aktuella och relevanta p medlemsstaterna17.
29 30 of SIS II and are responsible for coordinating the quality control of information entered in the systems18. 
De nationella byrerna samordnar SIS II:s funktion och br ansvaret fr att samordna kontrollen av kvaliteten p den information som lggs in i systemen18.
66 Data quality gained greater prominence in 2018 with the new eu-LISA regulation19, which assigns the Commission and eu-LISA responsibilities in the process of assuring data quality. 
66 Uppgiftskvalitet fick strre betydelse 2018 i och med den nya eu-Lisa-frordningen19, dr kommissionen och eu-Lisa ges ansvarsomrden i frga om att skerstlla uppgifters kvalitet.
The regulation introduced the requirement for eu-LISA to carry out automated data quality checks and report on data quality indicators for SIS II, VIS and Eurodac. 
Genom frordningen infrdes krav p att eu-Lisa genomfr automatiska kontroller av uppgifters kvalitet och rapporterar om uppgiftskvalitetsindikatorer fr SIS II, VIS och Eurodac.
67 Since April 2017, eu-LISA has performed automated monthly data quality checks on certain SIS II alerts (e.g. for problems with transliteration of names from languages with non-Latin alphabets, or automated controls skipped by entering generic words such as “UNKNOWN”). 
67 Sedan april 2017 har eu-Lisa varje mnad utfrt automatiska kontroller av uppgifters kvalitet i vissa registreringar i SIS II (t.ex. fr att upptcka problem som rr translitterering av namn p sprk med icke-latinska alfabet eller att automatiska kontroller inte har utfrts p grund av att generiska ord som t.ex.
These checks generate a report listing the individual alerts with potential quality issues and transmit it directly to the country concerned. 
Genom dessa kontroller genereras en rapport ver enskilda registreringar med potentiella kvalitetsproblem som versnds direkt till det berrda landet.
However, in line with the legal requirements on data protection, eu-LISA itself cannot see these individual alerts – the agency can only see the aggregate numbers of quality issues for each type of alert and each country. 
30 byrn kan enbart se det sammanlagda antalet kvalitetsproblem fr varje typ av registrering och fr varje land.
68 The monthly reports show approximately 3 million warnings of potential data quality issues (out of an average total of 82 million records) meaning that the data might not meet the SIS II data quality requirements. 
68 Mnadsrapporterna visar omkring tre miljoner varningar fr potentiella problem med uppgiftskvaliteten (av i genomsnitt totalt 82 miljoner poster), vilket betyder att uppgifterna eventuellt inte uppfyller kraven fr uppgifters kvalitet i SIS II.
We found that neither eu-LISA nor the Commission have any enforcement powers to ensure that Member States correct data quality issues in a timely manner. 
Vi konstaterade att varken eu-Lisa eller kommissionen har befogenhet att se till att medlemsstaterna korrigerar problem med uppgifters kvalitet inom rimlig tid.
Indeed, the monthly reports show no significant reduction in the number of SIS II quality warnings. 
Mnadsrapporterna visar inte heller p ngon betydande minskning av antalet kvalitetsvarningar i SIS II.
Furthermore, since eu-LISA cannot see the individual alerts, it has no way of knowing whether the alerts in a given month are new or remain unresolved from previous reports. 
Eftersom eu-Lisa inte kan se de enskilda registreringarna har byrn vidare inte ngon mjlighet att ta reda p om registreringarna en viss mnad r nya eller r desamma som i tidigare rapporter och inte har korrigerats.
Besides this overview, which is of limited use as a quality management tool, we did not obtain any evidence of other automated data quality checks at EU level. 
Utver denna verblick, som r av begrnsad nytta som verktyg fr kvalitetshantering, fann vi inga belgg fr andra automatiska kontroller av uppgifters kvalitet p EU-niv.
69 According to the Commission’s evaluation of SIS II20, Schengen States have cited data quality problems as a frequent and recurring issue. 
69 Enligt kommissionens utvrdering av SIS II20 har Schengenstater uppgett att problem med uppgifters kvalitet r vanliga och terkommande.
20 Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the evaluation of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) in accordance with Articles 24(5), 43(3) and 50(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Articles 59(3) and 66(5) of Decision 2007/533/JHA, 21.12.2016, p. 
31 20 Rapport frn kommissionen till Europaparlamentet och rdet om utvrderingen av andra generationen av Schengens informationssystem (SIS II) i enlighet med artiklarna 24.5, 43.3 och 50.5 i frordning (EG) nr 1987/2006 och artiklarna 59.3 och 66.5 i beslut 2007/533/RIF, 21.12.2016, s.
71 For example, we found alerts where the first name of the person was inserted as a surname and missing or incomplete dates of birth making it difficult to identify the person21. 
71 Till exempel fann vi registreringar dr en persons frnamn uppgavs vara efternamnet och dr fdelsedatum saknades eller var ofullstndigt, vilket frsvrade identifiering av personen21.
As a result of such issues, when border guards check a name in SIS II, they may receive hundreds of results (mostly false positives), which they have to check manually. 
Nr grnskontrolltjnstemn kontrollerar ett namn i SIS II kan de till fljd av sdana problem f hundratals resultat (mest falska positiva resultat) som de mste g igenom manuellt.
This not only makes border control less efficient, but also increases the risk of real hits being overlooked. 
Detta leder inte bara till att grnskontrollerna blir mindre effektiva utan kar ven risken fr att verkliga trffar frbises.
72 Incomplete records in SIS II also reduce the efficiency of other systems linked to it. 
72 Ofullstndiga uppgifter i SIS II leder ven till att andra system som r kopplade till SIS II blir mindre effektiva.
For example, when Schengen States’ authorities are checking passenger information on the PNR list, they normally check it against alerts in SIS II. 
Nr myndigheter i Schengenstaterna till exempel kontrollerar passagerarinformation i en PNR-frteckning kontrollerar de den vanligtvis mot registreringar i SIS II.
Incomplete alerts generate a large number of false positives wrongly indicating that a passenger is suspect. 
Ofullstndiga registreringar fr med sig ett stort antal falska trffar som felaktigt indikerar att en passagerare r misstnkt.
Since every alert must be checked manually, this generates a significant workload for the Passenger Information Units processing the PNR lists. 
Eftersom varje registrering mste kontrolleras manuellt leder detta till en betydande arbetsbrda fr de enheter fr passagerarinformation som behandlar PNR-frteckningarna.
73 VIS can only record short-term Schengen visas, even though Schengen States are still using over 200 different types of national visas and residence permits to allow third-country nationals to enter and travel around the Schengen area. 
73 VIS kan enbart registrera Schengenviseringar fr kortare vistelser, trots att Schengenstaterna fortfarande anvnder ver 200 olika typer av nationella viseringar och uppehllstillstnd som tillter tredjelandsmedborgare att resa in och omkring i Schengenomrdet.
These permits are registered only in national databases, which are not shared with other countries. 
Dessa tillstnd registreras enbart i nationella databaser som inte delas med andra lnder.
Almost 2.6 million such permits were issued in the Schengen area in 201722. 
Nstan 2,6 miljoner sdana tillstnd utfrdades i Schengenomrdet 201722.
There is currently no legal basis for recording these permits in the central VIS system. 
Det finns fr nrvarande ingen rttslig grund fr att registrera dem i det centrala VIS-systemet.
21 Numerous Member States have cited data quality problems as a frequent and recurring issue according to the Commission in its evaluation of SIS II. 
32 21 Flera medlemsstater har uppgett att problem med uppgifters kvalitet r vanliga och terkommande enligt kommissionens utvrdering av SIS II.
Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the evaluation of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) in accordance with Articles 24(5), 43(3) and 50(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Articles 59(3) and 66(5) of Decision 2007/533/JHA, 21.12.2016. 
Rapport frn kommissionen till Europaparlamentet och rdet om utvrderingen av andra generationen av Schengens informationssystem (SIS II) i enlighet med artiklarna 24.5, 43.3 och 50.5 i frordning (EG) nr 1987/2006 och artiklarna 59.3 och 66.5 i beslut 2007/533/RIF, 21.12.2016.
22 Eurostat statistics (first permits in 2017): http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=migr_resfirst&lang=en 31 
22 Eurostats statistik (frsta tillstnden 2017): http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=migr_resfirst&lang=en
74 The Commission has identified this information gap and is currently working on a regulation to address the issue23. 
74 Kommissionen har identifierat denna informationslucka och arbetar fr nrvarande med en frordning fr att ta itu med problemet23.
However, since these travel documents can be valid for up to 10 years, they will remain outside the system for years before the information gap is closed. 
Eftersom resehandlingarna kan vara giltiga i upp till tio r kommer de att frbli utanfr systemet i ratal tills informationsluckan har tgrdats.
75 In relation to Eurosur, one weakness is that Member States submit their reports in different formats. 
75 En brist nr det gller Eurosur r att medlemsstaterna lmnar in sina rapporter i olika format.
This means that the information cannot be easily aggregated and may not even be accessible to other Member States for technical reasons. 
Det innebr att det inte r enkelt att sammanstlla informationen och att den kanske inte ens r tillgnglig fr andra medlemsstater av tekniska skl.
76 Data is usually entered into Eurosur manually. 
76 Uppgifter matas vanligtvis in i Eurosur manuellt.
When there is an increase in events at the borders, it can be difficult for an operator to record these quickly in the system. 
Nr antalet incidenter vid grnserna kar kan det vara svrt fr operatrer att registrera dem snabbt i systemet.
Furthermore, some Member States report incidents on a case-by-case basis, while others provide only aggregated data. 
Vidare rapporterar vissa medlemsstater incidenter frn fall till fall medan andra enbart tillhandahller sammanstllda uppgifter.
Some Member States create an incident report for each individual, while others create one incident report covering numerous people. 
Vissa medlemsstater skapar en incidentrapport fr varje enskild person medan andra skapar en incidentrapport som omfattar flera personer.
This renders the statistics on the number of incidents reported by Member States irrelevant, because they do not show the true scale of the problem. 
Det gr att statistiken om antalet incidenter som rapporterats av medlemsstaterna r irrelevant, eftersom den inte visar problemets verkliga omfattning.
It also makes it difficult for Frontex to monitor developments and prioritise the allocation of additional resources as needed. 
Det gr det ven svrt fr Frontex att vervaka utvecklingen och prioritera tilldelning av ytterligare resurser vid behov.
Events are not always recorded promptly in the systems 77 Border guards need to have access to up to date information on people crossing the border in order to do their job effectively. 
Incidenter registreras inte alltid snabbt i systemen 77 Grnskontrolltjnstemn mste ha tillgng till aktuell information om mnniskor som korsar grnsen fr att de ska kunna utfra sitt arbete p ett ndamlsenligt stt.
Sometimes, however, Member States do not enter information as soon as they become aware of it. 
Ibland matar dock inte medlemsstaterna in information s snart de ftt knnedom om den.
For Eurodac there is a legal deadline for entering information on asylum 23 COM(2018) 302, Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 767/2008, Regulation (EC) No 810/2009, Regulation (EU) 2017/2226, Regulation (EU) 2016/399, Regulation XX/2018 [Interoperability Regulation], and Decision 2004/512/EC and repealing Council Decision 2008/633/JHA. 
23 COM(2018) 302, frslag till Europaparlamentets och rdets frordning om ndring av frordning (EG) nr 767/2008, frordning (EG) nr 810/2009, frordning (EU) 2017/2226, frordning (EU) 2016/399, frordning XX/2018 [frordning om interoperabilitet] och beslut 2004/512/EG och om upphvande av rdets beslut 2008/633/RIF.
24 Source: Evaluation of Regulation (EU) No 1052/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 establishing the European Border Surveillance System (Eurosur), 12.9.2018, p. 
24 Klla: Evaluation of Regulation (EU) No 1052/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 establishing the European Border Surveillance System (Eurosur) (utvrdering av Europaparlamentets och rdets frordning (EU) nr 1052/2013 av den 22 oktober 2013 om inrttande av ett europeiskt grnsvervakningssystem (Eurosur)), 12.9.2018, s.
However, SIS II and Eurosur do not have such specific time limits for entering information25. 
Fr SIS II och Eurosur finns dock inga specifika tidsfrister fr att mata in information25.
79 Eurosur is meant to provide real-time information on the situation at the borders, but the timeliness of the information depends on how promptly the Member States enter it. 
79 Syftet med Eurosur r att tillhandahlla realtidsinformation om situationen vid grnserna, men hur aktuella uppgifterna r beror p hur snabbt medlemsstaterna matar in dem.
Some of the countries covered by our audit do indeed enter information into Eurosur on a real-time basis, while others do so only once a week. 
Vissa av de lnder som omfattas av vr revision matar faktiskt in uppgifter i Eurosur i realtid, men andra gr det enbart en gng i veckan.
This means that an incident at the border (i.e. a large group of migrants arriving) might not appear in the European system until up to one week later. 
Det innebr att en incident vid grnsen (t.ex. att en stor grupp migranter anlnder) kanske inte registreras i det europeiska systemet frrn en vecka senare.
80 The Dublin regulation26 states that the country through which the asylum seeker first entered the European Union is responsible for examining an application for asylum. 
80 I Dublinfrordningen26 anges att det land som en asylskande frst kom till i Europeiska unionen br ansvaret fr att prva en asylanskan.
Member States have a maximum time limit of 72 hours27 to take fingerprints and transmit them to Eurodac, starting from the moment a person seeks asylum or is apprehended during an irregular border crossing. 
Medlemsstaterna ska inom 72 timmar27 frn det att en person sker asyl eller grips i samband med en irreguljr grnspassage ta fingeravtryck och verfra dem till Eurodac.
If the person seeking asylum moves to another Member State, the delayed transmission can lead to the wrong Member State being designated responsible for processing the asylum application (see paragraphs 55-56). 
Om den person som sker asyl flyttar till en annan medlemsstat kan en frsening av verfrandet leda till att fel medlemsstat utses till ansvarig fr att behandla asylanskan (se punkterna 55Đ56).
25 PNR data is generated during reservation, and airlines are subject to fines for late delivery of passenger lists. 
34 25 PNR-uppgifter genereras vid reservationer, och flygbolag lggs bter om de tillhandahller passagerarlistor fr sent.
For VIS, the data is automatically generated when a visa is issued. 
Nr det gller VIS genereras uppgifterna automatiskt nr en visering utfrdas.
26 Regulation (EU) No 604/2013. 
26 Frordning (EU) nr 604/2013.
27 Article 9(1) and Article 14(2) of the Eurodac Regulation. 
27 Artiklarna 9.1 och 14.2 i Eurodac-frordningen.
Picture 1 – Collecting fingerprints for registration in Eurodac 34 © EU, 2015/Source: EC - Audiovisual Service/Photographer: Angelos Tzortzinis 81 Since Eurodac started operating, there has not been a single year in which all Member States have transmitted the required information on time. 
Bild 1 Đ Insamling av fingeravtryck fr registrering i Eurodac 35 Š EU, 2015/klla: Kommissionen Đ audiovisuella tjnsten/fotograf: Angelos Tzortzinis 81 Sedan Eurodac brjade anvndas har inte alla medlemsstater verfrt den information som krvs i tid ngot enda r.