The threat of war crimes, the escalating violations of international humanitarian law and the human rights situation in El-Obeid, Sudan
Adopted 476 for · 28 against · 96 abstentions · 119 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 | 142 | 18 | 2 | 22 | 88% |
| S&D | 109 | 1 | 0 | 25 | 99% |
| PfE | 12 | 26 | 24 | 23 | 42% |
| ECR | 35 | 30 | 2 | 17 | 52% |
| Renew | 65 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 100% |
| Greens/EFA | 49 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 100% |
| The Left | 35 | 1 | 0 | 9 | 97% |
| ESN | 14 | 11 | 0 | 2 | 56% |
| NI | 15 | 9 | 0 | 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: B10-0357/2026
Procedure: 2026/2799(RSP)
Committee:
9 July 2026, 12:40 · 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.