BETA


Events

2022/01/26
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2021/10/06
   EP - Decision by Parliament
Details

The European Parliament adopted by 377 votes to 248, with 62 abstentions, a resolution on artificial intelligence (AI) in criminal law and its use by the police and judicial authorities in criminal matters.

This resolution addresses the issues raised by the use of AI in criminal law and its use by police and judicial authorities in criminal matters. While recognising the potential opportunities and benefits that AI can bring, it also highlighted the significant risks and consequences that it can bring. It also highlighted the risks it may entail for the protection of people's fundamental rights.

Respect for fundamental rights

Given that the processing of large amounts of data is at the heart of AI, Members believe that the EU legal framework on data protection and privacy must be fully respected and should form a basis for any future regulation of AI for law enforcement and judicial use. The use of AI applications must be prohibited when incompatible with fundamental rights. Moreover, the use of AI applications should be categorised as high-risk in instances where there is the potential to significantly affect the lives of individuals.

Parliament reaffirmed that all AI solutions for law enforcement and the judiciary also need to fully respect the principles of human dignity, non-discrimination, freedom of movement, the presumption of innocence and right of defence, including the right to silence, freedom of expression and information, freedom of assembly and of association, equality before the law, the principle of equality of arms and the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial, in accordance with the Charter and the European Convention on Human Rights.

Risk of discrimination

Many algorithmically driven identification technologies currently in use disproportionately misidentify and misclassify and therefore cause harm to racialised people, individuals belonging to certain ethnic communities, LGBTI people, children and the elderly, as well as women.

Parliament called for algorithmic explainability, transparency, traceability and verification as a necessary part of oversight, in order to ensure that the development, deployment and use of AI systems for the judiciary and law enforcement comply with fundamental rights, and are trusted by citizens, as well as in order to ensure that results generated by AI algorithms can be rendered intelligible to users and to those subject to these systems.

Members considered that strong efforts should be made to avoid automated discrimination and bias and they called for safeguards against the misuse of AI technologies by law enforcement and judicial authorities also need to be regulated uniformly across the Union.

Mandatory impact assessments

Members called for a compulsory fundamental rights impact assessment to be conducted prior to the implementation or deployment of any AI system for law enforcement or the judiciary, in order to assess any potential risk to fundamental rights. These impact assessments should be conducted with the active participation of civil society. They should clearly define the safeguards needed to address the identified risks and be made public, as far as possible, before the deployment of any AI system.

Parliament called for periodic mandatory auditing of all AI systems used by law enforcement and the judiciary where there is the potential to significantly affect the lives of individuals. It also highlighted the need for specialised training regarding the ethical provisions, potential dangers, limitations, and proper use of AI technology, especially for police and judiciary personnel.

Guarantee human intervention

Members called for the precautionary principle to be respected in all law enforcement applications of AI and stressed that in judicial and law enforcement settings, the decision giving legal or similar effect always needs to be taken by a human, who can be held accountable for the decisions made. Those subject to AI-powered systems must have recourse to remedy.

Surveillance and mass profiling

Parliament called for the permanent prohibition of the use of automated analysis and/or recognition in publicly accessible spaces of other human features, such as gait, fingerprints, DNA, voice, and other biometric and behavioural signals. It also called for a ban on the use of private facial recognition databases (such as the Clearview AI system).

Members called for a moratorium on the deployment of law enforcement facial recognition systems for identification purposes, unless they are only used for the purpose of identifying victims of crime, until technical standards can be considered fully respectful of fundamental rights.

Members also supported a ban on mass-scale scoring of individuals using AI.

Lastly, Parliament expressed concern about research projects funded under Horizon 2020 that deploy artificial intelligence at external borders , such as the iBorderCtrl project, a ‘smart lie detection system’ for travellers entering the EU. It called on the Commission to implement, if necessary through infringement procedures, the ban on any processing of biometric data for law enforcement purposes leading to mass surveillance in publicly accessible areas.

Documents
2021/10/05
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2021/10/04
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2021/07/13
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary
Details

The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs adopted an own-initiative report by Petar VITANOV (S&D, BG) on artificial intelligence (AI) in criminal law and its use by the police and judicial authorities in criminal matters.

The use of AI in law enforcement entails a number of potentially high, and in some cases unacceptable, risks for the protection of fundamental rights of individuals, such as opaque decision-making, different types of discrimination and errors inherent in the underlying algorithm which can be reinforced by feedback loops, as well as risks to the protection of privacy and personal data, the protection of freedom of expression and information, the presumption of innocence, the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial.

This report addresses the issues raised by the use of AI in criminal law and its use by police and judicial authorities in criminal matters. While recognising the potential opportunities and benefits that AI can bring, it also highlighted the significant risks and consequences that it can bring.

Respect for fundamental rights

Given that the processing of large amounts of data is at the heart of AI, Members believe that the EU legal framework on data protection and privacy must be fully respected and should form a basis for any future regulation of AI for law enforcement and judicial use. The use of AI applications must be prohibited when incompatible with fundamental rights . Moreover, the use of AI applications has to be categorised as high-risk in instances where there is the potential to significantly affect the lives of individuals.

The report reaffirmed that all AI solutions for law enforcement and the judiciary also need to fully respect the principles of human dignity, non-discrimination, freedom of movement, the presumption of innocence and right of defence, including the right to silence, freedom of expression and information, freedom of assembly and of association, equality before the law, the principle of equality of arms and the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial, in accordance with the Charter and the European Convention on Human Rights.

Any AI tools either developed or used by law enforcement or the judiciary should, as a minimum, be safe, robust, secure and fit for purpose, respect the principles of fairness, data minimisation, accountability, transparency, non-discrimination and explainability. Furthermore, their development, deployment and use should be subject to risk assessment and strict necessity and proportionality testing, where safeguards need to be proportionate to the identified risks.

Surveillance and mass profiling

Many algorithmically driven identification technologies currently in use disproportionately misidentify and misclassify and therefore cause harm to racialised people, individuals belonging to certain ethnic communities, LGBTI people, children and the elderly, as well as women.

Members considered that safeguards against the misuse of AI technologies by law enforcement and judicial authorities should be regulated uniformly across the EU.

The report stressed the legal obligation to prevent mass surveillance using AI technologies and to prohibit the use of applications that could lead to it. It called for increased efforts to avoid automated discrimination and automation bias.

Risks of data leaks

The report stressed that the safety and security aspects of AI systems used by law enforcement and judicial authorities must be carefully considered and sufficiently robust and resilient to prevent the consequences of malicious attacks against AI systems. It stressed the importance of safety by design , as well as specific human oversight before the use of certain critical applications and called for law enforcement and judicial authorities to use only those AI applications that respect the principle of privacy and data protection by design so as to avoid misuse.

Members called for the precautionary principle to be respected in all law enforcement applications of AI and stressed that in judicial and law enforcement settings, the decision giving legal or similar effect always needs to be taken by a human , who can be held accountable for the decisions made.

Mandatory impact assessments

The report called for the algorithmic explicability, transparency, traceability and verification as a necessary part of oversight, in order to ensure that the development, deployment and use of AI systems for the judiciary and law enforcement comply with fundamental rights and are trusted by citizens.

Members called for a compulsory fundamental rights impact assessment to be conducted prior to the implementation or deployment of any AI system for law enforcement or the judiciary, in order to assess any potential risk to fundamental rights. These impact assessments should be conducted with the active participation of civil society. They should clearly define the safeguards needed to address the identified risks and be made public, as far as possible, before the deployment of any AI system.

The report called for periodic mandatory auditing of all AI systems used by law enforcement and the judiciary where there is the potential to significantly affect the lives of individuals. It also highlighted the need for specialised training regarding the ethical provisions, potential dangers, limitations, and proper use of AI technology, especially for police and judiciary personnel.

Facial recognition

Members called for a moratorium on the deployment of facial recognition systems for law enforcement purposes that have the function of identification, unless strictly used for the purpose of identification of victims of crime, until the technical standards can be considered fully fundamental rights compliant.

Documents
2021/06/29
   EP - Vote in committee
2020/10/15
   EP - VITANOV Petar (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in LIBE
2020/09/14
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2020/09/09
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2020/07/17
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2020/06/08
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2020/02/18
   EP - KOLAJA Marcel (Verts/ALE) appointed as rapporteur in IMCO
2020/02/18
   EP - DZHAMBAZKI Angel (ECR) appointed as rapporteur in JURI
2020/01/16
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament

Documents

Activities

Votes

L’intelligence artificielle en droit pénal et son utilisation par les autorités policières et judiciaires dans les affaires pénales - Artificial intelligence in criminal law and its use by the police and judicial authorities in criminal matters - Künstliche Intelligenz im Strafrecht und ihre Verwendung durch die Polizei und Justizbehörden in Strafsachen - A9-0232/2021 - Petar Vitanov - § 6/1 #

2021/10/05 Outcome: +: 650, -: 34, 0: 8
IT DE ES PL FR RO NL BE CZ PT EL SE AT BG HU SK IE FI HR LT DK LV SI EE MT CY LU
Total
75
94
58
51
79
32
29
21
21
21
21
20
19
17
16
14
13
14
12
10
14
8
8
7
6
6
6
icon: PPE PPE
176

Hungary PPE

1

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Latvia PPE

2

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Malta PPE

2
2

Luxembourg PPE

2
icon: S&D S&D
140

Czechia S&D

For (1)

1

Greece S&D

2

Hungary S&D

For (1)

1

Lithuania S&D

2

Latvia S&D

2

Slovenia S&D

2

Estonia S&D

2

Cyprus S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1
icon: Renew Renew
98

Italy Renew

2
3

Austria Renew

For (1)

1

Hungary Renew

2

Ireland Renew

2

Finland Renew

3

Croatia Renew

For (1)

1

Lithuania Renew

1

Latvia Renew

For (1)

1

Slovenia Renew

2

Estonia Renew

3

Luxembourg Renew

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
71

Spain Verts/ALE

3

Poland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Belgium Verts/ALE

3

Czechia Verts/ALE

3

Portugal Verts/ALE

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

3

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Ireland Verts/ALE

2

Finland Verts/ALE

3

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

2

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
63

Germany ECR

1

Romania ECR

1

Greece ECR

1

Bulgaria ECR

2

Slovakia ECR

For (1)

1

Croatia ECR

1

Lithuania ECR

1

Latvia ECR

2
icon: The Left The Left
39

Netherlands The Left

For (1)

1

Belgium The Left

For (1)

1

Czechia The Left

1

Sweden The Left

For (1)

1

Finland The Left

For (1)

1

Denmark The Left

1

Cyprus The Left

2
icon: NI NI
34

Germany NI

2

Netherlands NI

1

Slovakia NI

2

Croatia NI

Abstain (1)

2

Lithuania NI

1
icon: ID ID
71

Netherlands ID

Against (1)

1

Czechia ID

2
3

Finland ID

2

Denmark ID

For (1)

1

Estonia ID

For (1)

1

A9-0232/2021 - Petar Vitanov - § 6/2 #

2021/10/05 Outcome: +: 365, -: 289, 0: 38
ES FR NL DE PT BE FI RO AT EL DK IE CZ HR SE LU MT CY SK LT SI LV BG EE IT HU PL
Total
58
79
29
94
21
21
14
32
19
21
14
13
21
12
20
6
6
6
14
10
8
8
17
7
75
16
51
icon: S&D S&D
140

Greece S&D

2

Czechia S&D

For (1)

1

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2

Lithuania S&D

2

Slovenia S&D

2

Latvia S&D

2

Estonia S&D

2

Hungary S&D

For (1)

1
icon: Renew Renew
98

Finland Renew

3

Austria Renew

For (1)

1

Ireland Renew

2

Croatia Renew

For (1)

1
3

Luxembourg Renew

2

Lithuania Renew

1

Slovenia Renew

2

Latvia Renew

For (1)

1

Estonia Renew

For (1)

Against (2)

3

Italy Renew

2

Hungary Renew

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
71

Spain Verts/ALE

3

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Portugal Verts/ALE

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

3

Finland Verts/ALE

3

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Denmark Verts/ALE

2

Ireland Verts/ALE

2

Czechia Verts/ALE

3

Sweden Verts/ALE

3

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Poland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1
icon: The Left The Left
39

Netherlands The Left

For (1)

1

Belgium The Left

For (1)

1

Finland The Left

For (1)

1

Denmark The Left

1

Czechia The Left

1

Sweden The Left

For (1)

1

Cyprus The Left

2
icon: NI NI
34

Netherlands NI

1

Germany NI

2

Croatia NI

Abstain (1)

2

Slovakia NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Lithuania NI

1
icon: ECR ECR
63

Netherlands ECR

Against (1)

4

Germany ECR

Against (1)

1

Romania ECR

1

Greece ECR

1

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1
3

Slovakia ECR

Against (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Latvia ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2
icon: ID ID
71

Netherlands ID

Against (1)

1

Finland ID

2
3

Denmark ID

Abstain (1)

1

Czechia ID

2

Estonia ID

Against (1)

1
icon: PPE PPE
176

Belgium PPE

Abstain (1)

4

Finland PPE

3

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1

Croatia PPE

Abstain (1)

4

Luxembourg PPE

2

Malta PPE

2

Cyprus PPE

2

Slovenia PPE

4

Latvia PPE

2

Estonia PPE

Against (1)

1

Hungary PPE

Against (1)

1

A9-0232/2021 - Petar Vitanov - § 24 - Am 1 #

2021/10/05 Outcome: -: 389, +: 268, 0: 35
PL HU CZ IT AT EE SK LT SI BE DK EL MT CY IE LU BG HR LV FI RO PT SE NL DE ES FR
Total
51
16
21
75
19
7
14
10
8
21
14
21
6
6
13
6
17
12
8
14
32
21
20
29
94
58
79
icon: PPE PPE
176

Hungary PPE

1

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Malta PPE

2
2

Luxembourg PPE

2

Latvia PPE

2
icon: ECR ECR
63

Slovakia ECR

Against (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Greece ECR

Against (1)

1

Bulgaria ECR

2

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Latvia ECR

2

Romania ECR

Against (1)

1
3

Netherlands ECR

4

Germany ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: ID ID
71

Czechia ID

For (1)

Against (1)

2
3

Estonia ID

For (1)

1

Denmark ID

For (1)

1

Finland ID

2

Netherlands ID

Against (1)

1
icon: NI NI
34

Slovakia NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Lithuania NI

1

Croatia NI

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Netherlands NI

Against (1)

1

Germany NI

2
icon: The Left The Left
39

Czechia The Left

Against (1)

1

Belgium The Left

Against (1)

1

Denmark The Left

Against (1)

1

Cyprus The Left

2

Ireland The Left

Abstain (1)

4

Finland The Left

Against (1)

1

Sweden The Left

Against (1)

1

Netherlands The Left

Against (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
71

Poland Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Czechia Verts/ALE

3

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Lithuania Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

3

Denmark Verts/ALE

2

Ireland Verts/ALE

2

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

3

Portugal Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

3

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Spain Verts/ALE

3
icon: Renew Renew
98

Hungary Renew

2

Italy Renew

Against (2)

2

Austria Renew

Against (1)

1

Estonia Renew

Against (1)

3

Slovakia Renew

3

Lithuania Renew

Against (1)

1

Slovenia Renew

2

Ireland Renew

2

Luxembourg Renew

2

Bulgaria Renew

3

Croatia Renew

Against (1)

1

Latvia Renew

Against (1)

1

Finland Renew

3

Sweden Renew

3
icon: S&D S&D
140

Hungary S&D

Against (1)

1

Czechia S&D

Against (1)

1

Estonia S&D

2

Slovakia S&D

3

Lithuania S&D

2

Slovenia S&D

Against (2)

2

Belgium S&D

3

Greece S&D

2

Cyprus S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

Against (1)

1

Latvia S&D

2

Finland S&D

2

A9-0232/2021 - Petar Vitanov - § 27 - Am 2 #

2021/10/05 Outcome: -: 369, +: 297, 0: 26
IT HU CZ BE BG LT AT EE EL LV SK SI LU HR DK MT CY IE SE FI NL RO PT ES PL FR DE
Total
75
16
21
21
17
10
19
7
21
8
14
8
6
12
14
6
6
13
20
14
29
32
21
58
51
79
94
icon: PPE PPE
176

Hungary PPE

1

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Latvia PPE

2

Luxembourg PPE

2

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Malta PPE

2
2
icon: ID ID
71

Czechia ID

Against (2)

2
3

Estonia ID

For (1)

1

Denmark ID

For (1)

1

Finland ID

2

Netherlands ID

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
63

Bulgaria ECR

2

Lithuania ECR

1

Greece ECR

1

Latvia ECR

2

Slovakia ECR

Against (1)

1

Croatia ECR

1

Netherlands ECR

4

Romania ECR

Against (1)

1

Germany ECR

1
icon: NI NI
34

Lithuania NI

Abstain (1)

1

Slovakia NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Croatia NI

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Netherlands NI

Against (1)

1

Germany NI

2
icon: Renew Renew
98

Italy Renew

Against (2)

2

Hungary Renew

2

Belgium Renew

4

Bulgaria Renew

3

Lithuania Renew

Against (1)

1

Austria Renew

Against (1)

1

Estonia Renew

Against (1)

3

Latvia Renew

Against (1)

1

Slovakia Renew

3

Slovenia Renew

2

Luxembourg Renew

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Croatia Renew

Against (1)

1

Ireland Renew

2

Sweden Renew

3

Finland Renew

3
icon: The Left The Left
39

Czechia The Left

Against (1)

1

Belgium The Left

Against (1)

1

Denmark The Left

Against (1)

1

Cyprus The Left

2

Ireland The Left

Abstain (1)

4

Sweden The Left

Against (1)

1

Finland The Left

Against (1)

1

Netherlands The Left

Against (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
71

Czechia Verts/ALE

3

Belgium Verts/ALE

3

Lithuania Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

2

Ireland Verts/ALE

2

Sweden Verts/ALE

3

Finland Verts/ALE

3

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Portugal Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Spain Verts/ALE

3

Poland Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
140

Hungary S&D

Against (1)

1

Czechia S&D

Against (1)

1

Belgium S&D

3

Lithuania S&D

2

Estonia S&D

2

Greece S&D

2

Latvia S&D

2

Slovakia S&D

3

Slovenia S&D

Against (2)

2

Luxembourg S&D

Against (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2

Finland S&D

2

A9-0232/2021 - Petar Vitanov - § 31 - Am 3 #

2021/10/05 Outcome: -: 403, +: 259, 0: 30
IT HU CZ LT AT EE BE LV SI BG EL HR SK DK MT CY IE LU SE RO PT FI NL PL ES DE FR
Total
75
16
21
10
19
7
21
8
8
17
21
12
14
14
6
6
13
6
20
32
21
14
29
51
58
94
79
icon: PPE PPE
176

Hungary PPE

1

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Latvia PPE

2

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Malta PPE

2
2

Luxembourg PPE

2
icon: ECR ECR
63

Lithuania ECR

1

Latvia ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2

Greece ECR

1

Croatia ECR

1

Slovakia ECR

Against (1)

1

Romania ECR

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

4

Germany ECR

1
icon: ID ID
71

Czechia ID

Against (2)

2
3

Estonia ID

For (1)

1

Denmark ID

For (1)

1

Finland ID

2

Netherlands ID

Against (1)

1
icon: NI NI
34

Lithuania NI

1

Croatia NI

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Slovakia NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Netherlands NI

Against (1)

1

Germany NI

2
icon: The Left The Left
39

Czechia The Left

Against (1)

1

Belgium The Left

Against (1)

1

Denmark The Left

Against (1)

1

Cyprus The Left

2

Ireland The Left

Abstain (1)

4

Sweden The Left

Against (1)

1

Finland The Left

Against (1)

1

Netherlands The Left

Against (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
71

Czechia Verts/ALE

3

Lithuania Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Belgium Verts/ALE

3

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

2

Ireland Verts/ALE

2

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

3

Portugal Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

3

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Poland Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Spain Verts/ALE

3
icon: Renew Renew
98

Italy Renew

Against (2)

2

Hungary Renew

2

Lithuania Renew

Against (1)

1

Austria Renew

Against (1)

1

Estonia Renew

Against (1)

3

Belgium Renew

4

Latvia Renew

Against (1)

1

Slovenia Renew

2

Bulgaria Renew

3

Croatia Renew

Against (1)

1

Slovakia Renew

3

Ireland Renew

2

Luxembourg Renew

2

Sweden Renew

3

Finland Renew

3
icon: S&D S&D
140

Hungary S&D

Against (1)

1

Czechia S&D

Against (1)

1

Lithuania S&D

2

Estonia S&D

2

Belgium S&D

3

Latvia S&D

2

Slovenia S&D

Against (2)

2

Greece S&D

2

Slovakia S&D

3

Cyprus S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

Against (1)

1

Finland S&D

2

L’intelligence artificielle en droit pénal et son utilisation par les autorités policières et judiciaires dans les affaires pénales - Artificial intelligence in criminal law and its use by the police and judicial authorities in criminal matters - Künstliche Intelligenz im Strafrecht und ihre Verwendung durch die Polizei und Justizbehörden in Strafsachen - A9-0232/2021 - Petar Vitanov - Proposition de résolution (ensemble du texte) #

2021/10/05 Outcome: +: 377, -: 248, 0: 62
ES FR NL DE CZ DK BE FI SE PT RO AT EE BG LU LV MT CY SK LT IE HR SI EL IT PL HU
Total
59
79
29
91
20
14
21
13
20
21
32
19
6
17
6
8
6
6
14
10
13
12
8
20
74
52
17
icon: S&D S&D
138

Czechia S&D

For (1)

1

Finland S&D

1

Estonia S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Latvia S&D

2

Cyprus S&D

2

Lithuania S&D

2

Slovenia S&D

2

Greece S&D

2

Hungary S&D

For (1)

1
icon: Renew Renew
98

Finland Renew

3
3

Austria Renew

For (1)

1

Estonia Renew

3

Luxembourg Renew

2

Latvia Renew

For (1)

1

Lithuania Renew

1

Ireland Renew

2

Croatia Renew

For (1)

1

Slovenia Renew

2

Italy Renew

2

Hungary Renew

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
71

Spain Verts/ALE

3

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Czechia Verts/ALE

3

Denmark Verts/ALE

2

Belgium Verts/ALE

3

Finland Verts/ALE

3

Sweden Verts/ALE

3

Portugal Verts/ALE

1

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Ireland Verts/ALE

2

Poland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1
icon: The Left The Left
39

Netherlands The Left

For (1)

1

Czechia The Left

1

Denmark The Left

1

Belgium The Left

For (1)

1

Finland The Left

For (1)

1

Sweden The Left

For (1)

1