Activities of the European Ombudsman - annual report 2024
Rejected 233 for · 250 against · 76 abstentions · 159 did not vote
Details
The whole chamber
Seating as in the European Parliament chamber, in this order: The Left, S&D, Greens/EFA, Renew, EPP, ECR, PfE, ESN and the non-attached members.
How each group voted
| Group | For | Abst. | Against | Did not vote | Cohesion |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EPP | 136 | 4 | 1 | 43 | 96% |
| S&D | 4 | 0 | 105 | 26 | 96% |
| PfE | 60 | 0 | 0 | 24 | 100% |
| ECR | 4 | 39 | 18 | 20 | 64% |
| Renew | 17 | 2 | 42 | 15 | 69% |
| Greens/EFA | 0 | 2 | 43 | 8 | 96% |
| The Left | 0 | 1 | 35 | 10 | 97% |
| ESN | 1 | 21 | 1 | 5 | 91% |
| NI | 11 | 7 | 5 | 8 | n/a |
Source: European Parliament roll-call votes, via HowTheyVote (ODbL). Collected 8 November 2026.
How each country voted
Click a country to see its MEPsSource: European Parliament roll-call votes, via HowTheyVote (ODbL). Collected 8 November 2026.
Winning majority
The winning side was Against. Each group's position is the option chosen by most of its members who voted.
Decisive: S&D, Renew, Greens/EFA, The Left. Without the votes of any one of these groups on the winning side, the result would have flipped.
By country
About this vote
Reference: A10-0015/2026
Procedure: 2025/2138(INI)
Committee: PETI
12 March 2026, 12:16 · Strasbourg plenary
Debate: 12 March 2026 (verbatim report and video)
Explanations of vote
MEPs who explained their vote orally in plenary, in the order they spoke.
- Lukas SieperRenew · GermanyText and video →
Verbatim report of the European Parliament. © European Union, 2026 - Source: European Parliament.
Method
Cohesion is the share of the group's voting members who followed the group position, the option chosen by most of them. Off the group line: an MEP who voted differently from their group's position. Prepared with AI tools and reviewed by a person before publishing. Report an error: radar@parleon.eu.