Vote in the European Parliament

Discharge 2024: General budget of the EU - European Data Protection Supervisor

Pasquale Tridico – Motion for a resolution (as a whole)
Date: 29.04.2026·Reference: A10-0057/2026
Rapporteur: Pasquale Tridico

Overall Result

Adopted
  • 528 For
  • 59 Against
  • 62 Abstention
  • 70 Did not vote
Status and procedure

Outcome as recorded by the European Parliament.

Vote held on
Latest recorded step
Official Journal · (64 days ago)
Next scheduled step
No further step is scheduled in the source.
Publication in the Official Journal recorded

Procedure timeline

2025/2154(DEC) · DEC

Recorded procedure activities. These do not establish whether a law has entered into force.

  1. Recorded: Referral85 days until the next step
  2. Recorded: Committee stage100 days until the next step
  3. Recorded: Plenary47 days until the next step
  4. Recorded: Other activity134 days until the next step
  5. Latest recorded: Official Journal
Recorded activities (11)
  1. Referral to committee
  2. Committee opinion adopted
  3. Committee report tabled
  4. Committee amendments tabled
  5. Committee report adopted
  6. Tabling for plenary
  7. Plenary debate
  8. Other recorded activity
  9. Plenary vote
  10. Plenary vote results
  11. Publication in the Official Journal
Scheduled activities (not confirmation of completion)
  1. Plenary debate
  2. Plenary vote

Procedure file (OEIL) · European Parliament data
Retrieved:

Sources

Data: EP Open Data API

What is this about?

  • Discharge granted to Data Protection Supervisor for 2024.
  • Budget execution rate of 96 % for commitments.
  • New AI oversight tasks from 2026 for the EDPS.
Source: AI Summary with Mistral

Amendment history (1)

Wording as published by the EP, in English.

  1. Amendment 2 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

    Paragraph 20 a (new)

    Tabled by Dick Erixon, Nicolas Bay, Charlie Weimers +1 · ECR

    Added: 20 a. Deplores the European Data Protection Supervisor’s reprimand of 8 January 2025 to the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) concerning the sharing of operational data on human smuggling networks and irregular migrants with Europol; stresses that the right to data protection under Article 8 of the Charter and the supposed “freedom of movement” of illegal migrants are not absolute and may be limited under Article 52(1) where such limitations are provided for by law and are necessary and proportionate to protect the Union’s external borders and combat cross-border crime, in line with Article 3(2) TEU and Article 67(3), Article 77, Article 79(2), point (c), and Article 87(2), point (a), TFEU; underlines that illegal entrants have only one freedom — the freedom to be deported to their country of origin; recalls that the EDPS audit of October 2022 and report of May 2023 identified shortcomings in systematic debriefing-based transfers without the required assessment, but underlines that Article 90(2), point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 does not justify a ban on regular or proactive transfers of operational data and requires only that Frontex show that the transfer is strictly necessary for Europol’s mandate; recalls further that Europol’s mandate under Regulation (EU) 2016/794 covers migrant smuggling and trafficking in human beings and that Article 18(2) empowers Europol to carry out cross-checking and operational analysis; calls on the EDPS to immediately reverse its overly restrictive approach, and on Frontex to restore swift, regular and proactive operational data-sharing by establishing clear and workable criteria for the transmission of relevant operational data strictly necessary for Europol’s mandate, in full compliance with Union law;

Vote by political group

How the political groups voted

Members

Showing 10 of 719

Vote Position
NameCountryGroupVote Position
FranceEPP
For
FinlandS&D
For
PolandEPP
For
SloveniaGreens/EFA
For
FranceS&D
For
RomaniaEPP
For
ItalyGUE/NGL
For
LatviaECR
For
PolandECR
For
GermanyNI
For
Show more
Follow us on Instagram@checksomevotes@checksomevotes_en