Skip to content

← Decision 25 Decision 27 →

26 Resolutions & reports ·decision 26 of 27 on Wednesday, 29 April 2026

Monitoring the application of European Union law in 2023, 2024 and 2025

Committee report by Dainius Žalimas · voted 14:59–15:02

Non-binding texts in which Parliament states its position on a topic. They carry political weight but do not create law.

Adopted by a large majority 416 for · 190 against · 15 abstained (67 % in favour) Justice, rule of law & rights
The vote✦ In shortFull textProcedure

What Parliament decided

Adopted Adopted by a large majority

Parliament adopted the text as its official position.

For 416 Against 190 Abstained 15

Final vote — text as a whole at 15:02 · 67% of votes cast in favour · every MEP’s position →

Who backed it
  • The Left ✓
  • Verts/ALE ✓
  • S&D ✓
  • Renew ✓
  • PPE ✓
  • ECR ✗
  • PfE ✗
  • ESN ✗
  • NI ✗

Backed by The Left, Verts/ALE, S&D, Renew and PPE; opposed by ECR, PfE and ESN.

✦ What this vote decides · AI summary, based on the text voted on

Parliament adopted a resolution on monitoring the application of European Union law in 2023, 2024 and 2025. The resolution assesses the Commission's reports and stresses the need for regular, comprehensive reporting, noting concern over the lack of a 2024 report. It calls on the Commission to publish transparent criteria for infringement cases and to streamline the pre-litigation phase.

How the vote unfolded · 33 ballots

Before the final vote, MEPs decided on 12 amendments (12 rejected) and 20 parts of the text voted on separately (5 adopted, 15 rejected).

Roll calls requested by ECR, PfE, ESN · split votes by PfE · separate votes by PfE.

adopted rejected lapsed square = amendment circle = part of the text decisive vote Solid = roll call (click for every MEP’s vote); faded = no individual positions

All 33 ballots in voting order
1. Vote on text inserted after paragraph 1
— no individual positions recorded
Rejected
2. Separate vote on paragraph 2 requested by PfE
— no individual positions recorded
Rejected
3. Separate vote on paragraph 2 requested by PfE
— no individual positions recorded
Rejected
4. Separate vote on paragraph 2 requested by PfE
— no individual positions recorded
Adopted
5. Paragraph 2 — part 2 14:59 A10-0037/2026 – Dainius Žalimas – § 2/2 Part 2: ‘notes with concern that national constitutional and supreme courts in some Member States have been undermining the well-established doctrine of the primacy of EU law; stresses that such developments should always lead to swift enforcement activities by the Commission, including infringement procedures;’ requested by PfE requested by PfE
Adopted
6. Vote on text inserted after paragraph 2
— no individual positions recorded
Rejected
7. Vote on text inserted after paragraph 2
— no individual positions recorded
Rejected
8. Vote on text inserted after paragraph 2
— no individual positions recorded
Rejected
9. Separate vote on paragraph 3
— no individual positions recorded
Rejected
10. Amendment 7, adding text after paragraph 6 14:59 A10-0037/2026 – Dainius Žalimas – After § 6 – Am 7 requested by PfE
Rejected
11. Vote on text inserted after paragraph 9
— no individual positions recorded
Rejected
12. Amendment 12, adding text after paragraph 12 14:59 A10-0037/2026 – Dainius Žalimas – After § 12 – Am 12 requested by ESN
Rejected
13. Amendment 22 to paragraph 17 14:59 A10-0037/2026 – Dainius Žalimas – § 17 – Am 22D requested by ECR
Rejected
14. Amendment 8, adding text after paragraph 17 15:00 A10-0037/2026 – Dainius Žalimas – After § 17 – Am 8 requested by PfE
Rejected
15. Separate vote on paragraph 18
— no individual positions recorded
Rejected
16. Amendment 24 to paragraph 19 15:00 A10-0037/2026 – Dainius Žalimas – § 19 – Am 24D requested by ECR
Rejected
17. Vote on text inserted after paragraph 20
— no individual positions recorded
Adopted
18. Separate vote on paragraph 21
— no individual positions recorded
Rejected
19. Amendment 25, adding text after paragraph 22 15:00 A10-0037/2026 – Dainius Žalimas – After § 22 – Am 25 requested by ECR
Rejected
20. Separate vote on paragraph 23
— no individual positions recorded
Rejected
21. Separate vote on paragraph 23
— no individual positions recorded
Rejected
22. Amendment 13, adding text after paragraph 31 15:00 A10-0037/2026 – Dainius Žalimas – After § 31 – Am 13 requested by ESN
Rejected
23. Separate vote on paragraph 36
— no individual positions recorded
Rejected
24. Amendment 14 to paragraph 36 15:01 A10-0037/2026 – Dainius Žalimas – § 36 – Am 14 requested by ESN
Rejected
25. Separate vote on paragraph 36
— no individual positions recorded
Rejected
26. Amendment 28, adding text after paragraph 36 15:01 A10-0037/2026 – Dainius Žalimas – After § 36 – Am 28 requested by ECR
Rejected
27. Amendment 29, adding text after paragraph 36 15:01 A10-0037/2026 – Dainius Žalimas – After § 36 – Am 29 requested by ECR
Rejected
28. Separate vote on paragraph 47
— no individual positions recorded
Rejected
29. Separate vote on paragraph 48 requested by PfE
— no individual positions recorded
Adopted
30. Amendment 11, adding text after paragraph 48 15:01 A10-0037/2026 – Dainius Žalimas – After § 48 – Am 11 requested by PfE
Rejected
31. Amendment 6, adding text after recital D 15:01 A10-0037/2026 – Dainius Žalimas – After recital D – Am 6 requested by PfE
Rejected
32. Vote on text inserted after recital F
— no individual positions recorded
Adopted
33. Final vote — text as a whole 15:02 A10-0037/2026 – Dainius Žalimas – Motion for a resolution (as a whole)
Adopted

Part of the sitting of Wednesday, 29 April 2026. The vote was taken on Report A-10-2026-0037 in procedure 2025/2016.

New here? How plenary voting works
A sitting
One day of voting in plenary. Each subject is a report, resolution, agreement or objection; they are grouped by kind of decision, and each group says what “adopted” means there.
The ballots
Members vote on amendments and on parts of the text first, then on the text as a whole. That final, decisive vote is the result shown at the top of each subject.
Who voted how
Only roll-call votes record each Member’s vote — open one for every name and the breakdown by group. A show of hands records the outcome only.
Document & procedure
Each subject rests on a document (a committee report, a motion, a Council or Commission text) and belongs to a procedure, the whole file that can span years.
Group badges
How most of a group voted: ✓ For · ✗ Against · – Abstained · ~ Split (no majority).

Codes in ballot labels

  • Am 27 — amendment 27
  • § 5 — paragraph 5
  • § 5/2, part 2 — a , taken in parts
  • Am 3= 7= — identical amendments voted together
  • ***I — ; *** — ; * —
  • Lapsed —
  • A10-… — committee report; B10-… — motion
  • RC-B10-… — joint motion of several groups

All the terms used on this site