Briefing: Reform of the Schengen Borders Code

Erik Marquardt on April 17, 2024

Photo by Daniel Bernard via Unsplash.

What is it about?

The Schengen Borders Code regulates entry conditions and border controls at the EU's external and internal borders. It deals, for example, with the question of the conditions under which internal border controls are possible.

The Borders Code is an important instrument for ensuring freedom of movement in Europe; however, Member States often do not comply with the Code. For example, they introduce internal border controls and disregard the legal basis for them. These controls jeopardize the Schengen area by hindering the free movement of people, goods and services, which is so important for the functioning of the EU and its associated countries (Switzerland, Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein). In border regions in particular, internal border controls not only cost a lot of money, but also restrict people's lives. At the same time, they often do not lead to the achievement of self-imposed goals, for example because they cannot prevent asylum applications, although this is repeatedly claimed.

The reform

The European Commission attempted to reform the Schengen Borders Code in 2017, but the member states were unable to agree on a common position.

After the Member States closed internal borders during the coronavirus pandemic without coordination at EU level, the Commission proposed a new reform that includes provisions for major health emergencies, such as pandemics.
The Commission proposal from December 2021 was controversial to say the least, followed by an even more problematic Negotiating position of the Member States. Despite the often emphasized importance of the Schengen area for the realization of freedom of movement in the EU, these texts would have led to Member States being able to introduce endless internal border controls under certain circumstances. The European Parliament, on the other hand, with its Negotiating position a compromise that protects the Schengen area.

ECJ ruling on border controls

Parallel to the reform process of the Schengen Borders Code, the European Court of Justice has ruled in a Basic ruling not only interpreted the duration of internal border controls under the current code very strictly, but also clearly stated that endless internal border controls violate the freedom of movement enshrined in EU law. This made it clear that freedom of movement is a right that EU member states may not restrict indefinitely. The co-legislators (Council and Parliament) must therefore find a balance between "freedom" and "security" that only works with a fixed time limit for internal border controls in the reformed Schengen Borders Code.

The final compromise

The interinstitutional negotiations led to a Compromiseon which we will vote in the European Parliament in the last plenary week of the legislative period (end of April 2024).
We are critical of the outcome of the negotiations because: The maximum Duration of internal border controls to be increased from the current 6 months to 3 years. However, Member States have a new, more detailed reporting obligation when they introduce internal border controls. In return, the Commission has slightly more duties and powers to monitor application. Experts doubt whether this will lead to border controls being more restricted.

It will also there are additional reasons to allow internal border controls. This sensibly includes a health emergency on a large scale, but also the highly controversial reason of unauthorized secondary migration of third-country nationals on a large scale. This effectively legalizes the practice that has been in place since 2015 of member states introducing internal border controls in order to "curb" "irregular" migration.

The outcome of the negotiations also includes a new procedure for the internal transfer of third-country nationals without the right to stay between member states. This procedure will probably lead to an increase in "racial profiling" and, in the worst case, even Chain deportations can take place.

The introduction of the term "Instrumentalization", Member States can limit the number of border crossing points and their opening hours and intensify border surveillance if they feel that they are being instrumentalized. However, the exact cases that are considered instrumentalization are not defined at all and are therefore left to the discretion of the member states. In addition, the possibilities for police checks and the general number of police officers deployed on the territory have been Control and monitoring technologies expanded. These additional provisions shall enter into force immediately after publication if Parliament and the Council have given their consent.

In practice, however, it remains to be seen whether the Member States will actually comply with these new rules and whether the Commission will use its powers as guardian of the treaties to ensure that they do.

Study: Beyond borders, beyond boundaries

Erik Marquardt on February 19, 2024

My Dutch colleague Tineke Strik and I have commissioned a critical analysis of the EU's financial support for border regimes in Tunisia and Libya on behalf of the Green Group in the European Parliament.

You can find the entire study here German, English and French.

A two-page summary is available on German, English, Italian, French and Arabic.

Clear failings on the part of the Commission 

The border protection measures co-financed by the European Commission and the member states regularly result in serious human rights violations. These include the use of physical force or deliberate collisions by the Tunisian coast guard or the interception and deprivation of liberty of migrants, enslavement, forced labor, imprisonment, extortion and smuggling by the Libyan coast guard. 

These are enormous sums, over € 70 million each for Libya and Tunisia for the periods from 2018 to 2022; a detailed overview can be found in the first chapter of the study.

When allocating funds, the risk of human rights violations is not sufficiently taken into account, despite corresponding provisions in the NDICI regulation, among others, through which most measures have been financed since 2021. Even during the project period, it is unclear how the projects are monitored, as the European Commission does not provide any documents, citing confidentiality.

Next steps

Funds should only be disbursed if it can be ensured that they will not be used to support measures that are associated with human rights violations. A human rights impact assessment must not only be carried out at the beginning of the project; programs must also be reviewed and, if necessary, adjusted or interrupted during their term. To this end, it is important that sufficient documents are made available to the European Parliament. Civil society also has an important role to play here; it is important that civil society organizations are consulted in funding decisions.

Further information

In order to present the study, we held a conference on the same day. Event The human rights aspects in particular were discussed with Seawatch, the authors of the study and DG NEAR; a recording of the event can be made available on request.

You can download the summary (EN/DE/FR/IT/AR) and the entire study (DE/EN/FR) here download. The SZ also has reports.

Parliament condemns attacks on press freedom and rule of law in Greece

Erik Marquardt on February 7, 2024

Photo: Erik Marquardt

Today (Wednesday, February 7), we Members of the European Parliament voted for A resolution on the rule of law and media freedom in Greece. The Christian Democrats, together with the extreme right, had tried to prevent the vote and clear demands on the rule of law and media freedom. You can find the exact voting behavior here. In Greece, cases of spying on and harassment of journalists, opposition politicians and civil servants as well as attempts to intimidate independent media through targeted strategic lawsuits are on the rise. Last year, the Christian Democrat Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis and members of the Greek government refused to meet an official delegation from the European Parliament.

Bottom of the league in press freedom

All governments, even conservative ones, must abide by the law and human rights. In Greece, attacks on democracy, fundamental rights and media freedom are part of everyday life. In the Press freedom ranking by Reporters Without Borders Greece is ranked 107th in the EU and is even worse than Qatar. The criminalization and intimidation of people seeking protection, of people who offer help to refugees and of journalists who report on refugees is shameful and must come to an end.

The Greek government's unwillingness to investigate the Pylos shipwreck, which claimed over 600 lives, is indicative of a policy that the EU must condemn. The Greek government must not be allowed to get away with blatant breaches of the law because it is covered up by its conservative party colleagues. It is important that the European Parliament has taken a clear position today, even if the conservative and right-wing groups have tried to further obscure the reality in Greece with their motions.

What does the resolution say?

The European Parliament's resolution expresses serious concerns about press freedom in Greece. It highlights the threats of physical attacks, verbal attacks, including those on high-ranking politicians and ministers, the invasion of their privacy through spyware and strategic lawsuits (SLAPPs). The Greek government is urged to take all necessary steps to bring the perpetrators to justice and restore a safe environment for all journalists.

Systematic pushbacks

Regarding the systematic pushbacks and the treatment of refugees and asylum seekers, the European Parliament expresses its grave concern. It highlights the lack of progress in the investigation into the shipwreck of June 14, 2023, in which a fishing boat sank in the Ionian Sea off the coast of Pylos, killing more than 600 people on board. The resolution condemns systematic pushbacks and violence against people seeking protection, their arbitrary detention and the theft of their belongings. It expresses criticism of the conditions in the reception centers, particularly in relation to the protection of individuals from crime and access to basic sanitation.

Commission to enforce the law

Parliament calls on the Commission to assess compliance with EU law on border control and EU funding and condemns the Commission's dramatic failure to enforce EU laws on reception conditions, pushbacks and human rights. Instead of praising Greece, the EU Commission should initiate infringement proceedings. We call on the European Commission to use all means at its disposal to uphold European values and the rule of law.

Background

Study commissioned by me: "A lawless space – the systematic criminalization of refugees for driving a boat or car to Greece"

The plenary debate "Rule of law and media freedom in Greece" with a speech from me already took place in the plenary session in January and can be followed here.

GEAS: Not a good day for European asylum law

Erik Marquardt on December 20, 2023

Photo: Erik Marquardt

The Council and Parliament have agreed on a reform towards a common European asylum system. Here you will find a brief overview of the key results of the negotiations on the GEAS package.

The Council has prevailed over the Parliament in almost all relevant points. This reform missed the opportunity to put EU asylum policy on the right track. Instead, bureaucratic procedures and tougher asylum laws will now suddenly deter people from fleeing to Europe. This approach has already failed in recent years. We now face the threat of more irregular migration and a culture of disintegration towards people seeking protection. This policy of deterrence is obviously not weakening right-wing populism, but rather strengthening it. 

Detention-like conditions

A system is being created in which many people are to be locked up in detention-like conditions during their asylum procedures, a lot of additional bureaucracy is being created and significantly longer asylum procedures are threatened. The new solidarity mechanism will not be able to compensate for the additional chaos and suffering this will cause.

Many important details have simply not yet been finalized. There was not enough time to negotiate all the articles. Due to the political requirement to achieve a result by the end of the year, the content was subordinated to the goal of reaching a quick agreement. This is not how legislation should take place.

Particularly in the polarized debate on asylum policy, Europe deserves the Council and Parliament to be well rested and not to decide on key points in late-night meetings that leave many questions unanswered.

Scope for improvement

Parliament and the Council still have to vote on the legal acts. We will then work to ensure that the legal acts are implemented as sensibly as possible. In addition, it is now all the more important to use the scope for improvements beyond the current reform, as it contains many loopholes. 

Questions of integration, cooperation with third countries or labor migration play no role in the current asylum reform. We will continue to fight for binding distribution, better standards at the external borders and efficient asylum procedures. This is the only way to achieve a fair distribution of responsibility for the major challenges of asylum and migration policy. In addition, human rights and the Geneva Convention on Refugees must continue to apply in Europe. It is too early today to call a swan song for the right of asylum, even if this is not a good day for the right of asylum.

Question to the Commission on EU-funded detention center in Bosnia

Erik Marquardt on August 3, 2023

On April 19, I sent the following question to the Commission. The Commission has again taken more time than it should to reply. In the meantime Bosnian politician announces end of prison facilitybecause there is no legal basis for it. My question about the problematic wording of the Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi is simply ignored by him.

My request

In November 2022, Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi visited Bosnia and Herzegovina and announced that an additional EUR 500,000 will be used for the Lipa camp and detention center in order to âfake asylum seekersâ can be imprisoned[1]until they are returned to their countries of origin. The EU Special Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Johann Sattler, on the other hand, said last weekthat people may be detained there for a maximum of 72 hours. The EU funds for Lipa come from the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA).

The cantonal authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina state that the construction permit for the detention center in Lipa camp was never issued. The Prime Minister of Una-Sana Canton publicly expresses his concern about the lack of information about the object. Please answer the following questions individually.

  • 1.What is the Commission's view of the term âfake asylum seekersâ and how do they differ from âcorrectâ asylum seekers?
  • How many people can be detained in the Lipa camp and for what purpose, and how is it ensured that the money is not used for the detention of persons previously illegally deported from the EU by Croatian authorities?
  • 3.in the Commission's view, is the treatment of persons in the Lipa camp in accordance with EU and international law?

Answer given by Olivér Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission (2.08.2023)

It is one of the priorities of the EU, in accordance with international law, the principles and values of the EU and the protection of fundamental rights, as stated in the letters of the President of the Commission to the Council, The recent conclusions of the European Council and the EU Action Plan for the Western Balkans. Improve border management, ensure faster asylum procedures, combat migrant smuggling, and promote cooperation on readmission and return in order to counter irregular migration via the Western Balkan route.

The multifunctional reception and identification center in Lipa serves several purposes: Migrants are registered, their status is determined, and their identity is verified upon arrival and departure from the center. The center has significantly improved conditions for migrants and averted another humanitarian crisis, like the one in the winter of 2020â2021. At that time, several migrants were stranded without shelter in devastating conditions. The center is under the authority of the Foreigners Authority of the Ministry of Security of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) and can accommodate up to 1,500 people.

The new detention facility in Lipa will be a separate and fully self-contained facility that can accommodate up to twelve persons. In certain cases, in line with international standards and the EU acquis, temporary restrictions on freedom of movement and detention measures can be introduced here before the persons concerned are transferred to the immigration center in Lukavica (East Sarajevo). The Law on Foreigners (âZakon o strancimaâ) of BiH defines the circumstances under which the restriction of free movement can be approved. As immigration centers must comply with BiH legislation and international humanitarian standards, the EU regularly seeks information from authorities and partners on the management of the centers and frequently conducts on-site visits.

European Parliament calls for sea rescue mission in the Mediterranean Sea

Erik Marquardt on 15 July 2023

Finally! The EU Parliament has in a resolution clearly spoken out in favor of an EU sea rescue mission. In addition, we demand, among other things, that information about sea rescue cases be shared immediately, that the criminalization of sea rescue organizations be refrained from and that ships be allowed into the next safe port after sea rescues.
I negotiated the resolution for our group and even if we cannot immediately force the Member States to implement the measures, it is a clear sign of where the majority in Europe stands.

The deaths in the Mediterranean cannot be tolerated any longer.

I took the cover photo on a sea rescue mission after we gave people life jackets. Often on the overcrowded inflatable boats you can hardly see a piece of boat – only dozens of people in acute danger of their lives. This reality that every day is decided on life or death of many people at our external borders and the decision is too often that people just have to die in case of doubt, that must never become normal. But it has become normal and we have to change that again. Parliament's decision unfortunately does not bring about any concrete change, because Parliament cannot decide on operations and has only very limited powers in this area. But it does increase the pressure on the heads of state and government and sends a clear signal against right-wing populism.

Here are some of the demands from the resolution

  • We call for an EU maritime rescue mission.
  • Member States and the EU should finally comply with applicable international law and come to the aid of people in distress at sea.
  • We demand that the Commission creates a new, reliable and sustainable approach that ensures sea rescue and that we are no longer constantly dependent on ad-hoc solutions. The Commission should provide material, financial and operational support for this.
  • Member States and Frontex should proactively operate search and rescue missions and provide or deploy all necessary and available boats and equipment to save lives.
  • All Mediterranean states and Frontex should share or provide information on sea emergencies to ensure rescue.
  • Rescued people should be assigned to the nearest safe haven.
  • The Commission should set up a sea rescue contact group to coordinate missions by Frontex and member states and regularly inform the Parliament about it.
  • Frontex should share information about its operations and comply with Union law, just as member states do.
  • The Commission must ensure that Frontex and Member States only enter safe ports after rescue and do not expose asylum seekers to danger.
  • The dead of Pylos should be recovered, identified, their relatives informed and more bodies searched for. The survivors must be distributed in solidarity in the EU.
  • We advocate that safe escape routes are the best way to prevent deaths and therefore call for humanitarian corridors.

Here you can find the complete text on german and english.

Green delegation trip to the Greek border

Erik Marquardt on October 3, 2022

From September 19 to 21, I was part of a delegation from my group in the European Parliament, together with MEPs Tineke Strik from the Netherlands, Saskia Bricmont from Belgium and Gwendoline Delbos-Corfield traveled from France to Greece. The aim of the trip is to get a picture of the current situation of refugees in Greece – but also the situation of the rule of law and freedom of the press in general. The Greek government has had leading opposition politicians and journalists monitored by spyware and, according to Reporters Without Borders, the country is lagging behind in terms of press freedom, currently ranked 108 out of 180 countries – Only Russia and Belarus perform worse in Europe. 

RIC Fylakio – Conditions in the camps.

The focus of our trip was a visit to the Evros, the border river to Turkey. Here again and again particularly serious human rights violations – violent and systematic pushbacks – documented. In addition, we have also addressed issues related to biometric mass surveillance of protection seekers in so-called RIC (Reception and Identification Center). We visited the RIC in Fylakio, where people are actually allowed to be locked up for a maximum of 25 days. In practice, even children are locked up there for months and have no access to education or medical care. The camp itself is small, but full of locked doors and barbed wire, with no shade or color. People live in container houses with blocks for families, men and unaccompanied minors. The NGOs on the ground are so intimidated by the government that they are afraid to talk to us MPs for fear of losing access to the camp or funds if they do.

Dead on the Evros 

We were denied access to the border region, even though we are MEPs and I am responsible for external borders in Parliament. Unfortunately, the Greek authorities are concretely preventing me from doing my work as an MEP. We were standing in front of two containers, in which lay the bodies of 20 people found on the Evros River. This year alone, the bodies of 51 people have been found in the Greek border region. We talked to Dr. Pavlidis; he takes care of these cases on a voluntary basis, trying to create certainty for the relatives whether their missing sons, daughters or parents are still alive. Often the bodies are found only after months – also because NGOs are denied access to the border region.

Meeting with Frontex

All activities of the agency are based on the self-declared needs of the national authorities and are under that supervision. The Greek authorities try to keep Frontex away from their illegal activities and pushbacks, because Frontex should actually report them – which they have demonstrably not done in many cases. The border guards and supervisors we spoke with claim to report all activities, but have never witnessed any pushback. When we asked what they actually do all day, we did not receive a comprehensible answer.

Meeting with Notis Mitarachi 

On Tuesday we had a meeting with the Greek Minister of Migration Notis Mitarachi, who has repeatedly accused us MPs and also renowned international media of spreading fake news and Turkish propaganda when we talked about the obvious pushbacks, violence and disappearances at sea. The Greek government is not only building fences on the border, but also a wall of lies. In his speech, Mitarachi spoke of much better reception conditions and a minimal backlog of asylum procedures in the country, but did not address the issues raised by credible actors allegations of pushbacks raised and other human rights violations. I have confronted Mr. Mitarachi with several recent cases, including the Cases of people stranded on an island on the river Evros. But Mr. Mitarachi simply claimed that all these cases were lies and fabrications. 

Freedom of the press in Greece 

We met journalists who were involved in the coverage of the Predator case involved where Greece illegally wiretapped journalists and opposition politicians. Their accounts painted a picture of intimidation, national media that have become the government's mouthpiece, and a severe lack of resources for investigative journalism.

Lesbos 

After the end of the green mission, I traveled to Lesvos to see the situation in the Mavrouvoni camp, which was built after the fire in Moria and was intended as a short-term emergency solution. The situation in the camp is still not good, but it is also much better than a year ago due to the many NGOs and international pressure. How the situation was a year ago, I have written down here. Currently, a new camp is being built, which is even more remote than Mavrouvoni and should be ready next spring. It is feared that people will be locked up there and NGOs will not have access.

General situation in Greece 

On Tuesday, we met with experts in Athens who deal with the dangerous effects of biometric mass surveillance, corruption in the allocation of public funds, attacks on press freedom and the wiretapping scandal. The many discussions left the picture of a state where basic democratic standards and human rights are no longer respected. The EU, especially the Commission, must act quickly and build pressure to counter further deterioration. Civil society, independent journalists and refugees need active support to resist the attacks by the state and the government. 

Greek government lies

My visit to the Evros and Athens has shown me once again that the Greek government systematically lies in order to evade its responsibility and does not shy away from mistreating people on the run, intimidating NGOs and attacking and spying on journalists. But there is also an intact civil society that needs our support now to continue fighting for the rights of those seeking protection and for the preservation of democracy and the rule of law. 

Fire in Moria – call for emergency evacuation and relocation

Erik Marquardt on 11 September 2020

169 MEPs signed the call for immideate action on Moria. This is the letter:

To:
Vice-President Margaritis Schinas
Commissioner for Home Affairs, Ylva Johansson
Federal Minister for the Interior, Horst Seehofer

Brussels, 11 September 2020


Dear Vice President Schinas,
Dear Commissioner Johansson,
Dear Minister Seehofer,

The fire in the EU's biggest refugee camp Moria is a humanitarian disaster and a disaster for Europe as a whole. For far too long, Europe has ignored that the camp was heavily overcrowded and that people had to stay in Moria for years under slum-like circumstances. They had no access to proper sanitary facilities nor to appropriate accommodation. When Covid-19 broke out, not just the infected persons were put under quarantine, but the entire camp. More than 12,000 people were locked in a place where they had no possibility to protect themselves from the virus. The catastrophe was predictable. It is a shame for Europe that it was not prevented.

After Moria burnt down, more than 12,000 people are now stranded without even a tent or a roof over their heads. They urgently need our help. We, the undersigning MEPs urge you to provide immediate humanitarian and medical help, to evacuate the people as quickly as possible and to provide a sustainable solution for the people of Moria by relocating them to other Member States.

We call on you to support Greece with corona tests of all asylum seekers and locals on the island and with medical personnel and equipment for people with severe disease progression.

Many of us, including the President of our House, have already at the beginning of the Covid-19 crisis called for an evacuation of the camp and the relocation of asylum seekers from Moria to avoid an outbreak. We acknowledge that it is a challenge to evacuate now more than 12.000 persons at once and encourage you to look into all possibilities. People who cannot be immediately transferred to the mainland could also preliminarily be accommodated in cruise ships, which due to Covid-19 are currently out of operation, before they are relocated. In any case, we call on you to support Greece in providing emergency accommodation for the people of Moria where they can protect themselves from the virus.

We further urge you to ensure the relocation of asylum seekers from Moria to other Member States. Taking care of the people of Moria is not just the responsibility of Greece. Moria is a European refugee camp, and Europe has to stand by its responsibility. Many municipalities and regions in Europe have long declared their willingness to receive asylum seekers from Greece.

Since Wednesday night, thousands of people went on the streets to show their solidarity with the people of Moria and to call for their swift relocation. We fully support their call. We call on you to uphold our common European values and to relocate the people of Moria to places where they can find safety and dignified living condition.

Reconstructing Moria is not a solution, nor is it as a solution to create similar conditions in other camps. It will only lead to the same problems that have caused the catastrophe.

We call on you to ensure that the upcoming Pact on Migration and Asylum will be based on solidarity and the fair sharing of responsibilities among Member States. We must make sure that a humanitarian disaster like in Moria will never happen again.

We urge you to do everything possible to help the people of Moria and to show European solidarity!

Sincerely yours,

Erik MARQUARDT (Greens/EFA), initiator of the letter
Ska KELLER, Co-President of the Greens/EFA
Philippe LAMBERTS, Co-President of the Greens/EFA
Iratxe GARCÍA-PEREZ, President of the S&D group
AUBRY MANON, Co-President of GUE/NGL
Martin SCHIRDEWAN, Co-President of GUE/NGL
Juan Fernando LÓPEZ AGUILAR, Chair of the LIBE Committee
Maria ARENA, Chair of the DROI Committee
Younous OMARJEE (GUE/NGL)
Abir AL-SAHLANI (Renew)
Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ (S&D)
Agnes JONGERIUS (S&D)
Alexandra GEESE (Greens/EFA)
Alexis GEORGOULIS (GUE/NGL)
Alice KUHNKE (Greens/EFA)
Alviina ALAMETSÄ (Greens/EFA)
Andreas SCHIEDER (S&D)
Anna CAVAZZINI (Greens/EFA)
Anna DEPARNAY-GRUNENBERG (Greens/EFA)
Anne-Sophie PELLETIER (GUE)
Aurore LALUCQ (S&D)
Bas EICKHOUT (Greens/EFA)
Benoit BITEAU (Greens/EFA)
Bernard GUETTA (Renew)
Bernd LANGE (S&D)
Bettina VOLLATH (S&D)
Billy KELLEHER (Renew)
Brando BENIFEI (S&D)
Carlos ZORRINHO (S&D)
Caroline ROOSE (Greens/EFA)
Chris MACMANUS (GUE/NGL)
Ciaran CUFFE (Greens/EFA)
Clare DALY (GUE/NGL)
Claude GRUFFAT (Greens/EFA)
Claudia GAMON (Renew)
Cornelia ERNST (GUE/NGL)
Cristina MAESTRE MARTÍN DE ALMAGRO (S&D)
Damian BOESELAGER (Greens/EFA)
Damien CARÈME (Greens/EFA)
Daniel FREUND (Greens/EFA)
Danuta HUEBNER (EPP)
David CORMAND (Greens/EFA)
Deirdre CLUNE (EPP)
Delara BURKHARDT (S&D)
Diana RIBA I GINER (Greens/EFA)
Dietmar KÖSTER (S&D)
Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS (GUE/NGL)
Domenec RUIZ DEVESA (S&D)
Eider GARDIAZÁBAL RUBIAL (S&D)
Elena KOUNTOURA (GUE/NGL)
Elena YONCHEVA (S&D)
Ernest URTASUN (Greens/EFA)
Evelyn REGNER (S&D)
Fabienne KELLER (Renew)
Francisco GUERREIRO (Greens/EFA)
Francois ALFONSI (Greens/EFA)
Gabriele BISCHOFF (S&D)
Grace O’SULLIVAN (Greens/EFA)
Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD (Greens/EFA)
Hannah NEUMANN (Greens/EFA)
Hannes HEIDE (S&D)
Heidi HAUTALA (Greens/EFA)
Helmut GEUKING (ECR)
Helmut SCHOLZ (GUE/NGL)
Henrike HAHN (Greens/EFA)
Hildegard BENTELE (EPP)
Idoia VILLANUEVA (GUE/NGL)
Inmaculada RODRÍGUEZ-PIÑERO (S&D)
Irena JOVEVA (Renew)
Isabel CARVALHAIS (S&D)
Isabel CARVALHAIS (S&D)
Isabel GARCÍA MUÑOZ (S&D)
Isabel SANTOS (S&D)
Ismail ERTUG (S&D)
Jakop DALUNDE (Greens/EFA)
Jan-Christoph OETJEN (Renew)
Janina OCHOJSKA (EPP)
Jarosław DUDA (EPP)
Javier MORENO SÁNCHEZ (S&D)
Jerzy BUZEK (EPP)
João FERREIRA (GUE/NGL)
Jordi SOLÉ (Greens/EFA)
José GUSMÃO (GUE/NGL)
Jutta PAULUS (Greens/EFA)
Karen MELCHIOR (Renew)
Karima Delli (Greens/EFA)
Katarina BARLEY (S&D)
Kathleen VAN BREMPT (S&D)
Kati PIRI (S&D)
Katrin LANGENSIEPEN (Greens/EFA)
Kim VAN SPARRENTAK (Greens/EFA)
Klemen GROSELJ (Renew)
Konstantinos ARVANITIS (GUE/NGL)
Lara WOLTERS (S&D)
Laura FERRARA (NI)
Leila CHAIBI (GUE/NGL)
Lina GALVEZ MUÑOZ (S&D)
Lukasz KOHUT (S&D)
Magdalena ADAMOWICZ (EPP)
Malin BJÖRK (GUE/NGL)
Manu PINEDA (GUE/NGL)
Marc BOTENGA (GUE/NGL)
Marcos ROS SEMPERE (S&D)
Margarete AUKEN (Greens/EFA)
Margarida MARQUES (S&D)
Maria Eugenia RODRÍGUEZ PALOP (GUE/NGL)
Maria NOICHL (S&D)
Maria WALSH (EPP)
Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques (S&D)
Marie TOUSSAINT (Greens/EFA)
Marisa MATIAS (GUE/NGL)
Markéta GREGOROVÁ (Greens/EFA)
Martin HÄUSLING (Greens/EFA)
Martin SONNEBORN (NI)
Massimiliano SMERIGLIO (S&D)
Michael BLOSS (Greens/EFA)
Michèle RIVASI (Greens/EFA)
Mick WALLACE (GUE/NGL)
Miguel URBÁN CRESPO (GUE/NGL)
Milan BRGLEZ (S&D)
Monica Silvana GONZALEZ (S&D)
Monika VANA (Greens/EFA)
Mounir SATOURI (Greens/EFA)
Nico SEMSROTT (Greens/EFA)
Nicolae STEFANUTA (Renew)
Niklas NIENAß (Greens/EFA)
Nikolaj VILLUMSEN (GUE/NGL)
Özlem DEMIREL (GUE/NGL)
Pär HOLMGREN (Greens/EFA)
Pascal ARIMONT (EPP)
Patricia GUEGUEN (Greens/EFA)
Patrick BREYER (Greens/EFA)
Paul TANG (S&D)
Pernando BARRENA (GUE/NGL)
Peter VAN DALEN (EPP)
Petra DE SUTTER (Greens/EFA)
Petros KOKKALIS (GUE/NGL)
Pierfrancesco MAJORINO (S&D)
Pierrette HERZBERGER-FOFANA (Greens/EFA)
Pina PICIERNO (S&D)
Raphaël GLUCKSMANN (S&D)
Rasmus ANDRESEN (Greens/EFA)
Reinhard BÜTIKOFER (Greens/EFA)
Robert BIEDROŃ (S&D)
Romeo FRANZ (Greens/EFA)
Pink D’AMATO (NI)
Salima YENBOU (Greens/EFA)
Samira RAFAELA (Renew)
Sandra PEREIRA (GUE/NGL)
Sara CERDAS (S&D)
Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA)
Saskia BRICMONT (Greens/EFA)
Sergey LAGODINSKY (Greens/EFA)
Silvia MODIG (GUE/NGL)
Sira REGO (GUE/NGL)
Sophie IN’T VELD (Renew)
Stelios KOULOGLOU (GUE/NGL)
Sven GIEGOLD (Greens/EFA)
Sylwia SPUREK (S&D)
Tanja FAJON (S&D)
Terry REINTKE (Greens/EFA)
Thomas WAITZ (Greens/EFA)
Tiemo WÖLKEN (S&D)
Tilly METZ (Greens/EFA)
Tineke STRIK (Greens/EFA)
Udo BULLMANN (S&D)
Vera TAX (S&D)
Ville NIINISTÖ (Greens/EFA)
Viola VON CRAMON-TAUBADEL (Greens/EFA)
Yannick JADOT (Greens/EFA)

EN
EN DE