New Chinese law on 'ethnic unity and progress' and the intensified suppression of ethnic identities
Adopted 439 for · 52 against · 71 abstentions · 157 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 | 123 | 2 | 7 | 53 | 93% |
| S&D | 105 | 1 | 1 | 28 | 98% |
| PfE | 29 | 35 | 2 | 19 | 53% |
| ECR | 58 | 8 | 3 | 12 | 84% |
| Renew | 59 | 0 | 6 | 12 | 91% |
| Greens/EFA | 42 | 2 | 1 | 8 | 93% |
| The Left | 12 | 5 | 11 | 18 | 43% |
| ESN | 3 | 15 | 6 | 3 | 62% |
| NI | 8 | 3 | 15 | 4 | 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 For. Each group's position is the option chosen by most of its members who voted.
By country
About this vote
Reference: RC-B10-0216/2026
Procedure: 2026/2703(RSP)
Committee:
30 April 2026, 12:09 · Strasbourg plenary
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.