European Parliament Rejects Vote of No Confidence in the European Commission

Motion tabled by the Patriots for Europe group fails to secure the required majority in plenary vote.

Header Image

The European Parliament has rejected a vote of no confidence in the European Commission, following a roll-call vote held on Thursday.

The proposal, formally submitted as a motion of censure by the political group Patriots for Europe, was defeated with 165 votes in favour, 309 against and 10 abstentions.

The vote followed a plenary debate on Monday, 19 January, with European Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič, during which concerns raised by the group were discussed.

Background to the vote

The vote of no confidence was initiated over opposition to the EU–Mercosur trade agreement, which was approved by EU member states on 9 January and formally signed on 17 January in Paraguay.

Parliamentary procedure

Under the European Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, a vote of no confidence in the Commission requires the backing of at least one tenth of Members of the European Parliament, currently 72 MEPs. Adoption requires a double majority: two thirds of the votes cast and an absolute majority of the Parliament’s total membership.

The rejection of the motion means that the European Commission remains in office.

Related Articles

15 January 2026

POLITICS

Von der Leyen: EU and Cyprus ‘Navigate Turbulent Waters Together’

Commission President highlights Cyprus’ strategic and diplomatic role

15 January 2026

POLITICS

The European Commission Comes to Cyprus as Presidency Priorities Take Shape

The visit of the EU College of Commissioners marks a defining moment for Cyprus’ EU Council Presidency

15 January 2026

Top News

Cyprus to Get €1.18BN Through SAFE Defence Funding

EU approves defence plans for eight states; including Cyprus

Comments Posting Policy

The owners of the website www.politis.com.cy reserve the right to remove reader comments that are defamatory and/or offensive, or comments that could be interpreted as inciting hate/racism or that violate any other legislation. The authors of these comments are personally responsible for their publication. If a reader/commenter whose comment is removed believes that they have evidence proving the accuracy of its content, they can send it to the website address for review. We encourage our readers to report/flag comments that they believe violate the above rules. Comments that contain URLs/links to any site are not published automatically.