REPORT on the implementation of citizenship education actions

23.3.2022 - (2021/2008(INI))

Committee on Culture and Education
Rapporteur: Domènec Ruiz Devesa 

Procedure : 2021/2008(INI)
Document stages in plenary
Document selected :  


The European political system cannot work if citizens do not know or understand it

The ongoing process of globalisation and European integration requires the new generation of Europeans to increasingly engage politically at multiple levels, as well as to be able to live, work and integrate a growing level of diversity in their daily lives. The importance of education in this process is recognised in the European Pillar of Social Rights, which states that everyone has the right to quality and inclusive education to enable them to participate fully in society. From the analysis of key legislative texts and contributions by experts, stakeholders and studies emerges a threefold rationale for the need of stronger citizenship education covering all political levels, national, European and global.


Firstly, education is a fundamental enabler of an active and informed citizenship and thus, for democratic participation. The direction of a democratic political Union must be determined by the will of citizens. For many years, the emergence of a dynamic European citizenship has been hindered by a knowledge gap and a lack of emotional connection leading to the idea that the European Union is remote and complex.


Secondly, a series of events and socio-political changes reinvigorate the call for stronger citizenship education. The need to fight radicalisation, following the 13 November 2015 attacks in Paris by affiliates to the so-called Islamic State, led to the Paris Declaration of 2015 by European Ministers of Education, which highlighted the need to promote citizenship and common European values.


Equally, the controversy surrounding Brexit is a reminder of the impact that lack of information and of emotional attachment, coupled with misinformation and propaganda, can have on the Union. More recently, national-populist movements are instrumentalising Euroscepticism for political purposes. The same trends can be observed at national level where the risk posed by social polarisation and fake news put increasing pressure on our democratic systems.


Thirdly, deep structural changes also support the need to reinforce this area of education and to recognise the ever-evolving nature of citizenship education. For example, the digital shift opens new opportunities for online citizens’ participation and the environmental crisis highlights the need to act responsibly not only as members of a given political and social structure, but also as responsible inhabitants of the planet as a whole.


Citizenship education in European action


There is a strong standing political consensus among the EU institutions on the need to strengthen citizenship education. This will was already explicit in the Solemn Declaration on European Union signed on June 1983, at the Stuttgart European Council, where the heads of state and government committed to “improving the level of knowledge about other Member States of the Community and of information on Europe’s history and culture so as to promote a European awareness”.


Since then, all institutions have put forward a growing number of political declarations and policy commitments underlying the need to advance in the promotion of citizenship education, including European citizenship education. Most recently, the Declaration on promoting citizenship and the common values of freedom, tolerance and non-discrimination through education(2015), the European Parliament resolution of 12 April 2016 on Learning EU at school, the Communication of the Commission on Strengthening European Identity through Education and Culture (2017), the Council Recommendations on promoting common values, inclusive education and the European dimension in teaching and on key competences for lifelong learning (2018), the Commission Communication on achieving the European Education Area by 2025 (2020), the Council Resolution on a strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training towards the European Education Area and beyond (2021), and the European Parliament resolution of 11 November 2021 on The European Education Area: a shared holistic approach.


However, when comparing the sustained declaratory commitment and stated policy objectives regarding citizenship education to actual implementation, there is a glaring gap. A gap between policy and practice, but also between general policy goals and actual plans to achieve them. There is a lack of concrete targets regarding citizenship education. This same conclusion is reached regarding the teaching of common European values, understood as the values inscribed in Article 2 TEU, where there is weak implementation in education policy in terms of concrete curriculum instruments and in supporting measures[1].


Importantly, the rapporteur finds concerning the limited development of the 2018 Council Recommendation on Key Competencies with regard to the competence “Active Citizenship”. Most competences have been advanced by including dedicated benchmarks in the ET 2020 cooperation framework, in the European Skills agenda, or by developing at European level dedicated frameworks to support educational change (e.g. the Digital Competence Framework 2.0 or the EntreComp, the Entrepreneurship Competence Framework) Additionally, in 2020 a conceptual framework for Personal, Social, and Learning to learn[2] (LifeComp) competences was published by the Joint Research Centre, missing the opportunity to decisively advance on a framework for citizenship education


The main evidence of work undertaken in the area falls within the ET 2020 Working Group on Promoting Common Values and Inclusive Education that produced a compendium of best practices on different themes and carried out peer learning activities. This work is relevant to citizenship education, but falls short of an integrated and systematic approach on how to advance the teaching of citizens’ education in a comprehensive and structured manner. No evidence that the activities of the working group have a direct impact on advancing policy change in the area of citizenship education have been found, even if, several experts (e.g. Lithuania, Finland, Portugal, Croatia) acknowledged the positive influence of EU policy and actions on the implementation of citizenship education in their educational systems.


Contribution of EU programmes to the advancement of citizenship education


Erasmus +


ERASMUS Key Action 1, which focused on mobility, has indirectly increased the sense of belonging to the Union. However, while Key Action 1 (KA1) can enhance knowledge of the host country and provide a reflective approach towards the home country, there is a lack of evidence regarding the effects of KA1 on the acquisition of knowledge regarding the European Union as a whole. An Erasmus mobility experience can help to develop some competences and skills through informal learning in some areas related to citizenship, such as intercultural skills, or learning to live and work with others. However, the lack of formal components in KA1 hinders the potential of the action to foster citizenship education.


Key Action 2, Cooperation for innovation and the exchange of good practices, and Key Action 3, Support for policy reform as well as Jean Monnet Activities are found to be the actions with greater contributions to the advancement of citizenship education. Eight projects have been identified relating directly to citizenship education. However, the total budget of these projects amount merely to 0,000046% of the 2014-2020 budget. Analysis of various KA2 and KA3 projects has shown that they cover some areas related to citizenship education, in particular dialogue and inclusion, human rights, participation, citizenship and to a lesser extent EU citizenship. It also appears that political elements, such as political participation (elections) or common European values (democracy, rule of law or justice including social justice) are addressed to a marginal degree. The projects cover different aspects required to improve the understanding of how citizenship education can be taught effectively. For example, project outputs include curriculum development, methodological and pedagogical tools. Equally, projects cover all levels of education, that is primary, secondary and higher education. A small proportion also extend to adult learning, contributing, albeit in a limited way, to lifelong learning.


In terms of geographical coverage, while most countries of the Union have participated in projects, geographical balance should be improved. Regarding impact, problems of sustainability and difficulties when developing stable structures to continue with the project’s work, or to disseminate further the project’s outputs, even after the end of the project, is seen as the major shortcoming.


More is expected in this area under the Erasmus programme 2021-2027, as KA2 will devote greater attention to ‘common values, civic engagement and participation’ in lifelong learning and awareness on understanding the European Union and common EU values, but progress is yet to be demonstrated. Overall, a total lack of systemic impact can be observed regarding Erasmus actions in the field of citizenship education.


Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe


Horizon Europe is the main research programme of the EU, which can fund projects related to citizenship education. However, curricular, methodological and pedagogical approaches to teach citizenship education remain generally underdeveloped and suffer from lack of research. Evidence shows that, although many projects in Horizon 2020 focused on values that are relevant for European citizenship, only 8 research projects explicitly tackle citizenship education directly, adding up to an insignificant 0,00002% of the 2014-2020 budget. The projects cover a wide range of issues, exploring the link between citizenship development in public life and citizenship education in schools, as well as non-formal and informal education. They also research possibilities for new content, methodologies and activities through new participative, creative and technological methods. Research tends to concentrate on secondary education followed by primary education.


However, questions regarding impact arise from the limited size of the projects in question and their relatively short duration. Moreover, a clear unbalance regarding geographical coverage emerges from the analysis with more participants from Western and South Western Europe.


The 2021-2027 Horizon cycle pays greater attention to issues relevant to this implementation report. In particular, the Cluster 2 ‘Culture, Creativity and Inclusive society’ aims to strengthen European democratic values, including rule of law and fundamental rights. A recently published special call for Education for Democracy in 2022 is an indication of this. Nevertheless, it is too early to assess the impact of the current programme.


Europe for Citizens


The Europe for citizen’s programme (2014-2020), aimed among others objectives, to help citizens to understand EU history, values and diversity and to encourage engaging with democracy at EU level. The programme allowed for the participation of schools and its two funding streams, European remembrance and Democratic engagement and civic participation, were relevant to citizenship education.


The mid-term evaluation of the programme[3] has found that it has been effective in achieving these goals and that its activities have contributed to enhancing civic participation and the overall debate on the past, present and future of the EU. Nevertheless, concerns regarding the geographical spread, particularly in the town-twinning strand, and the sustainability of the actions financed are highlighted.


Regarding the specific contribution of Europe for citizen to citizenship education, the rapporteur found only 6 projects focusing on citizenship education[4], totalling almost 2% of the programme 2014-2020 budget, out of which only two involve the educational community directly, without information on the number final beneficiaries


Under the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values Programme 2021 -2027, the emphasis given to citizens’ engagement and participation is reinforced. This is apparent with the publication of a dedicated call for proposals[5] aiming at promoting the participation of citizens and representative associations in the democratic and civic life of the Union, which could involve the participation of schools and the educational community.


Creative Europe


The Creative Europe programme (2014-2020) did not have among its objectives to advance citizenship education or to improve knowledge of the EU directly. The programme does include among its goals the promotion of Europe’s cultural heritage as well as the better understanding of the common history of Europe. All actions financed through Creative Europe must deliver EU added value also indirectly, by improving citizen’s knowledge of cultures other than their own.


The rapporteur found only two projects[6] aiming explicitly to develop citizenship education in schools, which represents only 0,000007% of the 2014-2020 budget, through art and non-formal education. However, 24 projects dealing with citizenship were identified, showing the appetite of the beneficiaries of the programme to act in this area. Given the small amount of projects directly targeting citizenship education as an explicit aim, it is estimated that the overall impact across the Union is below its potential.


European Solidarity Corps


The European Solidarity Corps finances volunteer placements for young people across Europe. The programme was launched in 2018, which hinders the assessment of its impact due to the short time-frame of implementation. Despite this, its general objective is to strengthen cohesion, solidarity, democracy and citizenship in Europe, through active involvement. The rapporteur has identified 21 projects dealing directly with ‘citizenship education’[7], amounting to only 0.2 % of the 2018-2020 budget. It must be noted that there is an over representation of south-west Member States among the beneficiaries, generating a geographical imbalance and hindering the potential of the European Solidarity Corps. In addition, the limited budget of the new programme, just over 1 billion euros for the period 2021-2027, does not give any indication that the programme’s potential can be achieved.


The European Parliament Ambassador School Programme and Euroscola


The sustained growth of the European Parliament Ambassador School Programme (EPAS), implemented at EU level since 2016, has demonstrated the existing interest in providing and receiving EU citizenship education. EPAS reaches out to secondary and vocational schools and students. It has an inbuilt system of teachers’ training, thus all educators taking part in the programme have been trained in EU citizenship education.


After the school year 2020-2021, the network of EPAS counts with 3.897 Senior Ambassadors and 58.900 Junior Ambassadors, from 1.572 certified schools in the 27 Member States. During the school year 2020-2021, schools have hosted 11.980 EPAS events, with the participation of 242 MEPs. The introduction of digital participation has extended the reach of activities. Greater inter-institutional cooperation, in particular through the new Europe Direct centres, has also contributed to the expansion of the programme. However, difficulties to reach schools in rural areas remain. Equally, participation of teachers and students is done on voluntary basis, without official recognition of the programme by national authorities, limiting further engagement by participants. Furthermore, human and budgetary constraints pose difficulties to its EU-wide expansion.


Euroscola, set up in 1990, complements the EPAS, and has enabled students to participate in simulations of the European Parliament’s work. Each year, Euroscola hosts 20 sessions per year in Strasbourg, welcoming around 10.000 students aged between 16 to 18 years old from all Member States. The European Parliament has strengthened the synergy between the EPAS and Euroscola, enabling EPAS showing greater engagement to benefit from Euroscola, a highly regarded opportunity by participants.


Citizenship education in Member States


The conclusions reached in this report are based on the limited data available at the European level, which only offers a partial picture of how citizenship education is taught and integrated in schools across the Union. The most complete information offering comparable data for Member States is the International Civic and Citizenship Education Study (ICCS), supported by the European Commission, with its latest edition dating back to 2016 and covering only 14 Member States[8]. A new edition is expected by 2022. The European Commission Joint Research Centre carried out an analysis based on the ICCS data in 2018. This is complemented by the 2017 Eurydice report offering qualitative data covering all Member States. Additionally, the European Commission dedicated its 2018 Education and Training monitor to citizenship education. Complementing these sources, the EPRS 2021 report on implementation of citizenship education actions in the EU, offers a review of 10 Member States in 2021.


A further difficulty in assessing the implementation of citizenship education lies in the fluidity of the concept and the lack of a unified definition across studies.


Key findings on the implementation of education policies regarding citizenship education


Taking the broadest definition, the Eurydice 2017 report finds that citizenship education was part of the national curricula for general education in all countries. In most Member States there is a focus at the policy level on concepts such as democracy, freedom, justice and inclusion. These curricula combine classical approaches on citizenship education fostering a better understanding of political institutions and processes, with multidimensional skills and competences, to encourage constructive interactions, thinking critically and acting in a socially responsible and democratic manner. The ICCS study concludes that there is a predominant national focus in teaching citizenship education, while the international dimensions (European and global) is not so strong. In some Member States, tension arises between the national and supranational level as well as the collective and individual scope of citizenship education. In these cases, such as Poland or Hungary, more emphasis is placed on developing a nationalist interpretation of citizenship, culture and history valuing discipline and adaptation rather than on freedom and critical engagement. Moreover, the EPRS report highlights that citizenship education easily falls prey to politicisation, which impacts the content, methods and hours devoted to the subject. These factors can vary substantially with changes in government.


Modes of teaching citizenship education vary substantially. Citizenship education can be a separate subject, it can be integrated into broader compulsory subjects or learning areas such as the social sciences or language studies, or it may be a cross-curricular objective jointly delivered by different teachers. In practice, a preference for cross-curricular approaches can be observed. However, this requires considerable teacher training for a high number of teachers and coordination across faculties. As a separate subject, citizenship education is often taught at secondary level. In these cases, teacher training regarding content, competences and required skills is crucial to successful delivery. Moreover, specialised teachers can provide important support to others if the subject is taught transversally.


Often, curricula are accompanied with general, specific objectives as well as learning outcomes as guidance for curriculum implementation. In 2017, at least 19 countries combined all of them. Some experts point out that overloaded curricula, traditional teaching and highly centralised education systems create discrepancies between the curriculum prescriptions and actual practice in schools.


High variations across Member States are found regarding the time devoted to the subject. When the subject is taught independently, number of hours tend to be higher. A considerable variation is also found on the number of school years in which the compulsory separate subject is taught, ranging from 1 to 12 years.


In 2017, national tests in citizenship education were at some point administered in general education in 17 education systems, generally at the end of a school year. Only a few education systems administer such tests to evaluate the education system as a whole or to assess the school in order to improve the area of citizenship education.


Regarding preparedness to teach citizenship education, in 2017, half of the countries did not have regulations or recommendations in place concerning citizenship education competences through initial teacher education (ITE). Very few systems actually trained teachers on how to evaluate or continuously obtain up-to-date relevant knowledge on the core issues of citizenship education. This is particularly important regarding the European dimension of citizenship education, where deep knowledge about the Union is often lacking among educational professionals.


Importantly, there is a lack of understanding on how to evaluate effectively citizenship education, stemming from a lack of guidance by education authorities. In 2017, a third of the countries surveyed did not provide any central level regulations or recommendations on the assessment of citizenship education.


All sources indicate an even lower attention to citizenship education in initial vocational education and training (IVET) in comparison with general education.


Key findings on student’s attainment on citizenship education


The ICCS study showed an increase in average civic knowledge scores between the previous edition in 2009 and 2016. The results from the 2016 ICCS show a wide variation within and among the EU Member States participating in the study, with the majority of participant countries’ students showing competences above the threshold. Only 35% of students showed a holistic knowledge and understanding of civic and citizenship concepts and demonstrate some critical perspective. Additionally, the study showed gendered differences, with the female student population scoring statistically higher than their male counterparts. Experts warn that the threshold level will probably be insufficient to address the above-mentioned challenges and changes[9]; which highlights the need to devise new strategies for teaching citizenship education.


Regarding European citizenship education, the ICCS concludes that in 2016, 83 % of surveyed students reported they had opportunities to learn about the history of Europe in school. On average, only 50 % of students reported having opportunities to learn about Europe in school. Importantly, the report concluded that students’ support for cooperation among European countries was positively associated with higher levels of civic knowledge.


Both civic knowledge and civic self-efficacy when undertaking civic actions are predictors of students’ perceptions of democratic institutions. However, this does not always translate into greater trust in democratic institutions with only 50 % of students trusting civic institutions, while 70% of students trust the European Union and 72 % the European Parliament


When looking at implementation modes, studies conclude that students do not learn about citizenship only by acquiring knowledge. School practices such as classroom discussions and learning by doing activities foster critical thinking and help students understand others and develop open-minded social attitudes. Importantly, fostering active participation in democratic practices in school is positively related to their expected future political and electoral participation. Equally, active community involvement is positively associated with students’ civic attitudes. Lastly, a positive correlation was found between general education attainment and active citizenship.


While this report focuses mainly on formal education, studies and stakeholders highlight the importance of developing a lifelong learning approach to citizenship education.





on the implementation of citizenship education actions


The European Parliament,

 having regard to Articles 2 and 10(3) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU),

 having regard to Articles 9 and 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

 having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

 having regard to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, in particular, goal 4 (Quality education) and target 4.7,

 having regard to the Commission communication of 5 March 2020 entitled ‘A Union of Equality: Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025’ (COM(2020)0152),

 having regard to its resolution of 9 September 2015 on empowering girls through education in the EU[10],

 having regard to the Commission communication of 12 November 2020 entitled ‘Union of Equality: LGTBIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025’ (COM(2020)0698),

 having regard to its resolution of 25 March 2021 on shaping digital education policy[11],

 having regard to the Council of Europe Reference Framework of Competences for Democratic Culture,

 having regard to the conclusions of the Council and of the representatives of the governments of the Member States meeting within the Council on fostering democratic awareness and democratic engagement among young people in Europe[12],

 having regard to the Council of Europe Charter on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights Education,

 having regard to the Commission communication of 4 March 2021 on the European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan (COM(2021)0102),

 having regard to the European Pillar of Social Rights proclaimed and signed by the Council of the EU, the European Parliament and the Commission on 17 November 2017,

 having regard to the Commission communication of 14 November 2017 on Strengthening European Identity through Education and Culture – The European Commission’s contribution to the Leaders’ meeting in Gothenburg, 17 November 2017 (COM(2017)0673),

 having regard to the Commission communication of 14 June 2016 entitled ‘Supporting the prevention of radicalisation leading to violent extremism’ (COM(2016)0379),

 having regard to the Commission communication of 1 July 2020 entitled ‘European Skills Agenda for sustainable competitiveness, social fairness and resilience’ (COM(2020)0274),

 having regard to the Commission communication of 30 September 2020 entitled ‘Digital Education Action Plan 2021-2027 – Resetting education and training for the digital age’ (COM(2020)0624),

 having regard to the strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training (ET 2020), in particular its objective of promoting equity, social cohesion, and active citizenship,

 having regard to the Commission communication of 30 September 2020 on achieving the European Education Area by 2025 (COM(2020)0625),

 having regard to the Council recommendation of 22 May 2018 on key competences for lifelong learning[13],

 having regard to the Council recommendation of 22 May 2018 on promoting common values, inclusive education, and the European dimension of teaching[14],

 having regard to the Council resolution of 19 February 2021 on a strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training towards the European Education Area and beyond (2021-2030)[15],

 having regard to the conclusions of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the Council of 17 May 2021 on strengthening the multilevel governance when promoting the participation of young people in decision-making processes[16],

 having regard to the declaration on promoting citizenship and the common values of freedom, tolerance and non-discrimination through education (Paris Declaration 2015), signed on 17 March 2015 in Paris, France,

 having regard to the report by European Citizens’ Panel 1 of the Conference on the Future of Europe entitled ‘Stronger economy, social justice and jobs / Education, culture, youth and sport / Digital transformation’,

 having regard to the European Youth Event 2021 report entitled ‘Youth ideas report for the Conference on the Future of Europe’,

 having regard to the Commission’s Eurydice report of 7 November 2017 entitled ‘Citizenship Education at School in Europe, 2017’,

 having regard to the Union of European Federalists (UEF) resolution on a systematic approach to European citizenship education, adopted on 4 July 2021 at the UEF XXVII European Congress in Valencia,

 having regard to the May 2021 briefing by the European Parliamentary Research Service on the European Education Area and the 2030 strategic framework for education and training,

 having regard to the Commission’s Eurydice report of 19 October 2020entitled ‘Equity in school education in Europe – Structures, policies and student performance’,

 having regard to the Commission report of 15 December 2021 entitled ‘EU Citizenship Report 2020 – Empowering citizens and protecting their rights’ (COM(2020)0730),

 having regard to the Commission’s European democracy action plan of 3 December 2020,

 having regard to the summary of findings and of the discussions at the 2019 Forum on the Future of Learning, published by the Commission’s European education and training expert panel on 7 December 2019,

 having regard to the Commission report of June 2020 entitled ‘European Union Citizenship and Democracy’,

 having regard to the Jean Monnet Network’s 2017 guidelines for teacher educators on children’s identity and citizenship in Europe,

 having regard to the Commission report of 18 March 2015 entitled ‘Promoting citizenship and the common values of freedom, tolerance and non-discrimination through education – Overview of education policy developments in Europe following the Paris Declaration of 17 March 2015’,

 having regard to the 2018 and 2020 Education and Training Monitor,

 having regard to the European Education and Training Expert Panel’s issue paper on inclusion and citizenship,

 having regard to its resolution of 12 April 2016 on Learning EU at school[17],

 having regard to its resolution of 19 January 2016 on the role of intercultural dialogue, cultural diversity and education in promoting EU fundamental values[18],

 having regard to its resolution of 11 November 2021 on the European Education Area: a shared holistic approach[19],

 having regard to its resolution of 12 December 2017 on the EU Citizenship Report 2017: Strengthening Citizens’ Rights in a Union of Democratic Change[20],

 having regard to its resolution of 7 July 2021 on Citizens’ dialogues and Citizens’ participation in the EU decision-making[21],

 having regard to Rule 54 of its Rules of Procedure, as well as Article 1(1)(e) of, and Annex 3 to, the decision of the Conference of Presidents of 12 December 2002 on the procedure for granting authorisation to draw up own-initiative reports,

 having regard to the report of the Committee on Culture and Education (A9-0060/2022),

A. whereas education is a fundamental right and a public good that should be equally accessible, for free, to all; whereas the Pillar of Social Rights states that everyone has the right to quality and inclusive lifelong education and training in order to participate fully and meaningfully in society; whereas education and learning should not be seen solely as a tool to serve the labour market;

B. whereas new systemic challenges with local, regional and global impacts, such as climate change, the digital shift, social and territorial gaps, or supranational political integration itself, require the corresponding adaptation of educational systems, including citizenship education; whereas the green transition and the Green Deal call for an expansion of citizenship education to include the need to act responsibly, not only within a given community or society, but towards the planet as a whole; whereas the digital shift and the digital agenda not only open up new opportunities for active citizenship and democratic participation online, but also encompass risks and threats posed by misinformation and disinformation; whereas active digital citizenship should take into account and address the digital gap between the generations; whereas involving the local, national and European media in popularising European culture and history is an important part of public debate and citizenship engagement;

C. whereas citizenship education must be understood as multilevel, encompassing the local, regional, national, European and global dimensions of citizenship; whereas the ongoing process of globalisation and European integration will require the new generation of Europeans to increasingly engage politically at multiple levels, to be able to live and work internationally and navigate difference in their daily lives; whereas critical thinking, interpersonal skills and civic competences are ever more important in the labour market and social life; whereas societies are becoming more diverse, making respect for the diversity of cultures and origins and the rejection of any kind of discrimination against women, LGTBIQ people or minorities ever more important within Europe;

D. whereas citizenship education benefits from a cross-sectoral approach and mutual cooperation between formal, non-formal and informal education; whereas citizenship education allows educators and learners to discover values, attitudes, skills and knowledge and understand the world together, including through participatory pedagogy;

E. whereas socio-political changes observed in Member States, ranging from social polarisation and low institutional trust to democratic backsliding, the erosion of the rule of law, exclusionary nationalism and the instrumentalisation of Euroscepticism for political purposes, along with the rise of extremist movements, the resurgence of racism and xenophobia in all its forms, authoritarianism and misinformation and disinformation may pose a serious threat to European democracies and destabilise the EU as a whole; whereas strengthening citizenship education in formal, non-formal and informal settings, by means of a lifelong-learning education could play an important role in countering this trend and engendering a more open political discourse, as well as encouraging greater engagement of citizens in the political and legislative processes at national and European level;

F. whereas political support for the Union tends to be expressed in terms of feelings, attitudes and values rather than in terms of its concrete impact in citizens’ daily lives; whereas there is a lack of proximity to and understanding of the Union’s democratic processes and mechanisms of participation among citizens, especially young people; whereas a renewed European momentum for citizenship education can be a way of encouraging young people to take part in elections, limiting the allure of extremist and populist discourses, thereby also strengthening social cohesion;

G. whereas the emergence of a dynamic European citizenship has been hindered by a knowledge and emotional gap, as well as by a lack of mechanisms enabling citizens’ participation and dialogue; whereas European identity complements the multiple local, national, geographical, cultural or other identities a person might have; whereas insufficient knowledge of or ignorance about the EU and poor understanding of its functioning and added value may contribute to the perception of a democratic deficit and may lead to mistrust, civic disengagement and Euroscepticism in Member States;

H. whereas its resolution of 12 April 2016 on Learning EU at school called on the Commission to provide a common framework and to prepare guidelines with concrete examples of learning about the EU in order to foster objective and critical thinking about the benefits of the European Union for its citizens;

I. whereas its resolution of 11 November 2021 on the European Education Area calls for the EEA to allow for a greater flow of learners, teachers and knowledge, fostering a sense of European belonging and civic awareness, guaranteeing rights and values, providing fair and equal opportunities, and improving social cohesion;

J. whereas the Commission has failed to undertake any substantial initiative of a systemic nature in this strategic field; whereas existing EU programmes such as Erasmus+ or the European Solidarity Corps still have significant untapped potential for improving the implementation of citizenship education with a more strategic approach to the formal, non-formal and informal learning components of the programmes, and with better coordination of resources; whereas the Commission and the Member States should do more to improve and increase the information flow about the European Union and specific rights and obligations;

K. whereas several Member States have developed national volunteering schemes; whereas establishing and developing these schemes is important in order to foster practical citizenship education, strengthen social cohesion, enable mobilisation for causes of general interest, especially for those with fewer opportunities, and contribute to the personal and professional development of participants; whereas more European civic mobility can contribute to increasing young people’s sense of belonging to a European community, reinforcing the emergence of a citizens’ Europe; whereas national volunteering schemes have the potential to be a natural gateway to European mobility for young people, especially those with fewer opportunities;

L. whereas the European Solidarity Corps, launched in 2018 as a successor of the European Voluntary Service established in 1996, is the general European mobility programme for volunteering, but has a limited budget over the 2021-2027 period; whereas greater synergies and cooperation between the European Solidarity Corps and national volunteering systems, as well as between existing national volunteering systems through the European Solidarity Corps, should be developed;

The state of citizenship education in the EU

1. Regrets that there is no common definition of citizenship education; believes that teaching citizenship education involves a combination of knowledge, skills, methods, tools, content, competences, attitudes, values and care, and is essential for the creation of solidarity and a feeling of togetherness;

2. Considers that a minimum understanding of citizenship education should provide a theoretical understanding of political, legal, social, environmental and economic concepts and structures, including those pertaining to the European level, as well as global developments, commensurate with the level of education and training, and coupled with practical experiences; points out the importance of critical thinking and media literacy as an integral part of citizenship education; insists on the need for a pedagogical renewal and the adoption of a theoretical and practical approach to citizenship education in the Union; suggests utilising the definitions of citizenship education provided by the Council of Europe Charter on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights Education and the Council of Europe Reference Framework of Competences for Democratic Culture;

3. Is concerned about the limited focus on the European and global aspects of citizenship in national curricula; notes with concern that only half of the students studying in the EU report having opportunities to learn about Europe in school; highlights that students’ support for cooperation among European countries was positively associated with higher levels of civic knowledge; deplores the increasing tension between the national and the European level in some Member States’ curricula; is worried about the excessive politicisation of civic education and the consequences thereof, such as repeated and drastic curricula changes, and reiterates the need for long-term stability and coherence in the delivery of citizenship education;

4. Underlines that socio-political and global changes will require a substantial increase in the current level of quality and approaches to citizenship education; is worried that male students score significantly below their female counterparts[22]; is concerned about the imbalances in terms of average civic knowledge across and within Member States; notes that students living in rural, remote, socially disadvantaged regions and outermost areas face additional barriers when engaging with citizenship education programmes; affirms that every single learner must have access to high-quality citizenship education, focusing on their specific needs in terms of financing and infrastructure, among other resources, which is crucial for the successful creation of a European Education Area;

5. Points out that while some aspects of citizenship education are present in most national curricula, there are strong differences across and within Member States in terms of the education levels at which it is taught, the total hours devoted to the subject, its contents and methodologies; notes that only some Member States have structured assessments, objectives, pedagogical orientations or specific training for teachers; notes that even where these elements are present, there is a gap between the national programmes and their effective implementation in schools;

6. Recalls that the quality of teaching has the strongest impact on effective learning and that therefore initial and continuous training for all teachers and educators, irrespective of subject specialisation, must be a priority in the field of citizenship education and, in particular, as regards the European and global dimensions of citizenship education;

7. Highlights that the lack of solid research on how to teach and assess citizenship education in an effective manner, and the lack of appropriate pedagogical instruments to this end, hinder the effective teaching of citizenship education; notes that some empirical evidence points towards ‘whole school’ or ‘whole community’ approaches having a positive impact on civic skills and attitudes; believes that when approaching citizenship education, participatory pedagogies should be taken into account in order to enable learners to experience citizenship in all its dimensions and their role in and for the European Union, the Member States, the individual and society at large;

8. Decries the lack of attention to citizenship education in initial vocational education and training and adult education; calls for the inclusion of citizenship education at all levels of education, adapted to the specific characteristics and needs of learners; regrets the lack of emphasis placed on the value of intergenerational learning contexts that facilitate intergenerational dialogue;

9. Believes that it is never too early to learn about citizenship at regional, national, European and global level; notes that early childhood education plays an important role in the development of critical social and emotional skills, and plants the seeds of well-being, dialogue, mutual respect, understanding and common values;

10. Recalls the crucial pedagogical role of non-formal and informal learning, including volunteering, mentoring, debating and sports, in developing social and civic skills, competences and behaviours, and in shaping responsibly minded and active citizens;

EU policies in the field of citizenship education

11. Regrets that the political consensus at European level on the need to advance citizenship education and the teaching of common European values has not been translated into concrete objectives, targets, benchmarks and actions, and concludes that citizenship education policies are suffering from an implementation gap;

12. Finds that EU programmes make a limited contribution to advancing certain dimensions of citizenship education, mainly because of a lack of explicit direct support, limited resources and uneven geographical coverage; regrets that so far, EU-funded projects in this area have not had a widespread long-term impact;

13. Finds that there is a lack of policy coherence in the area of citizenship education at EU level, and that there is currently no policy instrument that brings together all relevant bodies and authorities in a structured way;

14. Concludes that EU programmes such as Erasmus+, Horizon Europe, the European Solidarity Corps, the Rights and Values programme or Creative Europe, among others, have contributed, mostly indirectly, to the active provision of citizenship education; notes, however, that they have not been able to yield any systematic, lasting impact;

15. Affirms that on the basis of Articles 9, 10, 165 and 166 TEU, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the EU has a primary responsibility to foster EU citizenship education as a way to ensure deeper knowledge among its citizens of the European project as a union of democratic states, thus guaranteeing its citizens the right to fully participate in political life and decision-making at EU level;

16. Highlights the will to encourage a European common identity through a common academic programme and to strongly integrate a European dimension into education, as expressed by citizens in the context of the Conference on the Future of Europe, as well as the demand by European young people that knowledge about the opportunities and benefits of Europe be included in curricula;

17. Notes that some Member States acknowledge the positive influence of EU policy developments in fostering educational change in the area of citizenship education;

18. Is concerned about the lack of effective action by the Commission regarding the advancement of the Key Competence for Lifelong Learning 2018 framework ‘Citizenship Competence’, while other basic competences are reflected in the ET 2020 benchmarks or are supported by dedicated competence frameworks to facilitate teaching and uptake at national level;

19. Draws attention to the award of the 2021 European Citizen’s prize to students’ debate initiatives; considers that, in a climate of increasing polarisation, democratic debate is more important than ever; believes that fostering skills and competences for debate is an integral part of citizenship education;

20. Notes the importance of citizenship education in raising awareness of the climate transition and for the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030; underlines the connection between citizenship education and education for sustainability, and the importance of coordinating the efforts being made to mainstream both areas into policies, curricula, pedagogical approaches and methodologies within formal, non-formal and informal learning and education;

Recommendations for a renewed European citizenship education

21. Encourages the Member States to support, review and update their education systems – and all forms of EU-related curricula content at all levels of education and learning, including vocational education and training – with a view to strengthening the EU dimension, while strongly encouraging regions and local authorities to do the same, in particular when they have direct competences within educational systems;

22. Underlines, in this regard, the importance of taking into account linguistic diversity within European citizenship education, with due consideration for minority and regional languages, as well as endangered languages;

23. Reiterates its call on the Member States and the educational community to involve all people, including those with a migrant background, migrants, refugees and faith communities, in two-way, respectful and empowering citizenship-building processes, ensuring active participation in civic and cultural life; believes that fostering a better understanding among citizens of the historical and personal causes of migrants’ journeys, including colonialism, as well as of shared cultural backgrounds, is an important component of global citizenship;

24. Asks the Member States to enhance and broaden initial and ongoing, professional and lifelong development opportunities for teachers, educators, families and the wider educational community, and to provide them with appropriate support and resources to teach citizenship education, developed in close collaboration with all relevant actors at EU and national level;

25. Urges the Commission, in this regard, to develop a common citizenship education competence framework for teachers and students for the Key Competence ‘citizenship’, including multilingual and intercultural competences of educators, and taking the local, regional, national, European and global spheres into account, in a similar vein to the European Digital Competence Framework, the European Entrepreneurship Competence Framework, the European Framework for Personal, Social and Learning to Learn Key Competence and the recently launched European Sustainability Competence Framework, building relationships between all frameworks;

26. Stresses the need to promote and encourage mobility opportunities, peer-to-peer learning and exchanges of best practices among teaching staff; considers that the hybrid and flexible mobility features of the Erasmus+ programme 2021-2027 are an opportunity to increase mobility for current and future teachers; encourages the Commission to promote the short-term mobility of teachers and to establish long-term mobility partnerships, taking advantage of digital means without replacing physical mobility and interpersonal exchanges;

27. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to encourage and facilitate high-quality training, within working hours, on EU topics for teachers, other educational staff and youth leaders and trainers, including modules abroad, allowing them to spend part of their training in another Member State, and by ensuring the recognition of their competences to teach about the EU;

28. Calls for the creation and promotion of a ʻEuro Teacherʼ label award; reiterates its call to promote and develop ‘Erasmus+ Teacher Academies’ to foster a European dimension in education; calls on the Commission to dedicate a call for proposals to an Erasmus+ Teacher Academy dedicated to citizenship education for teachers, trainers and learners from both the formal and non-formal sector, including the vocational education and training (VET) sector;

29. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to strengthen synergies in order to increase the systemic impact of citizenship education, and to work together on the development of an initial teacher training module to familiarise teachers with European education systems, best pedagogical practices, EU exchange platforms, tools and partnerships reflecting European values and fostering the emergence of a European citizenship educational culture, while acknowledging diversities in Europe; underlines the need to include this type of training module in the Teacher Academies programme;

30. Calls for the recognition and validation of citizenship competences acquired through non-formal and informal learning, including youth work and volunteering, and for the strengthening of links between formal, non-formal and informal learning in citizenship education;

31. Considers that in the post-ET 2020 cooperation framework, attention should be focused on developing curricula and national assessments in citizenship education that integrate all relevant aspects of the subject area in line with the Council of Europe’s European Reference Framework for Democratic Culture and the European Reference Framework of Key Competences for Lifelong Learning, in particular with regard to social and civic competences, also taking into account informal and non-formal education, its coordination and facilitation;

32. Calls for the establishment of a new working group focusing on citizenship education to follow up on the work of the ET 2020 Working Group on Promoting Common Values and Inclusive Education set up after the 2015 Paris Declaration;

33. Calls for the development of tangible and measurable objectives and benchmarks on citizenship education, including European citizenship education, in the strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training towards the European area and beyond 2021-2030; points out that these objectives should be translated into targets for 2025, with specific targets for disadvantaged learners, and included in a specific European citizenship education action plan, taking into account a lifelong learning perspective, starting from early childhood;

34. Underlines the need for a more structured approach towards the identification and dissemination of the results of citizenship education projects from EU programmes, notably Erasmus+ , Horizon Europe, Europe for Citizens, the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values programme, Creative Europe and the European Solidarity Corps and its successors, in order to scale up results across the Union, with the involvement of the European Parliament in the process; considers, to this end, the need to establish a permanent review and analysis mechanism at EU level to identify good practices which can be disseminated and scaled up widely to contribute to systemic and long-lasting policy changes;

35. Highlights the need to decisively advance the research on how to best teach and assess citizenship education, and, in particular, for early childhood education, as well as the role of formal, non-formal and informal learning opportunities, and the monitoring of its implementation based on sufficient and updated comparative data from all Member States; underlines the importance of Key Action 2, Key Action 3, Jean Monnet chairs and Horizon Europe; welcomes the greater focus of Key Action 2 on ‘common values, civic engagement and participation’ in Erasmus+ 2021-2027;

36. Underlines the need to invest more in education formats about the European Union at school and university level by strengthening existing networks and developing new curricula adapted for this type of training; calls for the involvement of specialised faculties of European affairs in researching and deploying the best teaching methods and tools for citizenship education, while using available EU funds and resources;

37. Stresses that the substantive alignment of citizenship education must go hand in hand with the provision of digital competences and education if it is not only to meet the requirements of the digital transformation, but also to ensure the responsible use of digital media;

38. Reiterates its call on the Commission and the Member States to develop common and participatory educational research, in particular EU-wide comparable testing in the area of citizenship education, including EU citizenship, with a well-defined mandate and objectives within the remit of EU competences; recommends undertaking a Special Eurobarometer Survey on citizens’ general knowledge of the EU, broadening the scope of the current European Union citizenship and democracy series;

39. Calls on the Commission to include European citizenship learning modules and a visit programme to natural, cultural and mixed heritage and memory sites of environmental and historical significance for the Union and the host countries to promote an intercultural and dialogical approach to history and strengthen European values and principles as an integral part of all Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps mobility opportunities;

40. Calls on the Commission to promote citizenship education for all citizens, including adults, more actively and to reflect this in the relevant funding programmes and in the working groups; asks the Commission to link the initiatives of the European Skills Agenda to civic competences and to include digital citizenship in the development of the European Digital Skills Certificate;

41. Calls for the creation of European badges for schools and universities actively promoting citizenship education; calls for the creation of a European award supporting the educators and local actors who are actively promoting education about Europe;

42. Asks the Commission to assess the introduction of a new specific strand in the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values programme to foster citizenship education, with dedicated budgetary allocations, and to increase the actions and activities aimed at citizenship education under Erasmus+ and Horizon Europe with dedicated calls; urges the Commission to make the most of the 2022 European Year of Youth to develop specific programmes and actions strengthening European citizenship and identity;

43. Believes it is important to further disseminate existing opportunities at EU level among the VET educational community; considers it important to provide tailored support to facilitate access to the programmes; calls for the inclusion of a dedicated focus on citizenship education in all EU vocational education and training actions, in particular within the activities of the Centres of Vocational Excellence;

44. Highlights the role of the House of European History in furthering the development of specific programmes, instruments and activities that build up a cogent narrative of European integration and its basic values, in particular for students and teachers at all levels of education; asks the Commission to cooperate with Parliament in assessing means to decentralise the House of European history in order to broaden accessibility, including from the Member States and, in particular, the educational community, through, among other initiatives, enhanced collaboration with Member States’ cultural institutions, roving exhibitions and a network of permanent delegations;

45. Calls for a comprehensive European strategy on European civic and citizenship education, as well as the creation of supporting platforms to promote its implementation, focusing notably on shared EU democratic values and principles, and on fundamental rights – such as human dignity, democracy, the rule of law, human rights, equality, tolerance, respect for diversities and freedom of conscience – with the aim of enhancing citizens’ understanding of the EU institutions, the distribution of competences, the decision-making process and of EU policies, raising awareness of the benefits, rights and obligations of EU citizenship, furthering knowledge of the European integration process, of how to actively participate in the EU’s democratic processes and EU-decision making, as well as reinforcing a shared sense of belonging;

46. Encourages civil society organisations, institutions, experts and practitioners working in the field of civic education to increase cooperation and develop synergies through open transnational networks; highlights the role Networking European Citizenship Education has played in providing forums and aiming for a stronger prioritisation of citizenship education at national, European and international level; calls for a further institutionalisation of such European networks, as they develop and promote citizenship education initiatives across and beyond the Union;

47. Stresses that the strategy should include a lifelong learning and community perspective, involving the informal and non-formal sectors, as well as businesses and NGOs, in particular those that receive EU funding, which should directly contribute to enhancing knowledge about the EU among participants and the communities in which they are active;

48. Believes that the strategy should include synergies with relevant EU actions in the field of youth and EU policies combating racism and xenophobia in all its forms,  hate against LGTBIQ people and discrimination against women and minorities, by establishing links with the EU anti-racism action plan, and funding instruments such as the Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme;

49. Calls for the mainstreaming of citizenship education across the relevant EU programmes and for the synergies across them to be reinforced in order to increase the systemic impact of citizenship education, inter alia, by introducing and providing a module in EU citizenship to be taken as a training course prior, or in parallel to, undertaking a project financed by EU structural funds or a mobility opportunity through programmes such as Erasmus+ or the European Solidarity Corps; believes that undertaking a module in EU citizenship education should entail certification through micro credentials;

50. Encourages the Commission to promote learning about the EU at school in negotiation processes with candidate countries for EU membership;

51. Underlines the need to invest more in education formats about the European Union at school and university level, for both formal and vocational education and training, by developing new curricula; asks the Commission to propose a recommendation containing indicative primary, secondary and higher education, as well as vocational education and training, curricula on the EU and global civic education for its voluntary adoption by the Member States, in full respect of Treaty provisions, in particular Article 165 TFEU, developed jointly with Member States’ experts, specialised faculties of European affairs, teachers, educators, students and the wider educational community, and accompanied by incentive measures for its uptake; believes that said common demonstrative curricula should foster a better understanding of the history of European integration, the organisation and structure of the existing EU institutions, the European electoral and decision-making processes, including the means of citizens’ participation in the democratic life of the EU, combining different pedagogical approaches and methods, including theoretical and project-based learning, adapted to the needs of learners;

52. Calls on the Commission to step up its work on citizenship education to improve accessibility to and the quality of citizenship education in all Member States and to support the development of a European dimension in citizenship education for all ages; believes that a permanent structure should be in charge of creating synergies at European level on citizenship education, managing the EU resources allocated for this purpose and coordinating efforts on common methods, practices, tools and content; considers that it should also be in charge of data collection and of evaluating the impact of citizenship education actions financed by the Union, with a view to disseminating and upscaling the most successful actions and allowing the Commission, on this basis, to propose political and legislative initiatives in this field; believes that it should support opportunities for citizenship education training for teachers and educators alike and encourage cross-national exchanges;

53. Believes that kick-starting work in this direction by introducing a feasibility action focused on data collection and an evaluation of the impact of citizenship education actions coordinated by a dedicated units on citizenship education within the Commission’s Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture and the European Education and Culture Executive Agency is urgent; believes this could be an opportunity to increase the support to and coordination of Member States’ citizenship education actions and their implementation, to give strategic orientation for the development of national structures and curricula for citizenship education and to set minimum common standards in terms of content and methodology in citizenship and civic education across the Union; considers that in order to do so, these units should involve the Member States, the European Parliament, learners and the wider learning community;

54. Praises the Ambassador Schools Programme, which increases students’ awareness of European parliamentary democracy and of European values, as well as the Euroscola initiative, offering a practical immersive experience in the Chamber of the European Parliament for secondary school students, representing sustainable added value in terms of the individual provision of citizenship education and active participation in democratic life; calls for the introduction of certification and the recognition of the skills and competences obtained by participants, for learners and teachers alike; considers it a best practice that deserves to be scaled up to achieve a systemic effect across the Union;

55. Encourages all Member States to establish and develop national volunteering schemes; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure mutual recognition between national systems and increase European cooperation in civic services and youth volunteering; encourages national volunteering schemes and civic services to earmark European mobility experiences on a reciprocal basis;

56. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to develop European civic mobility in the framework of the European Solidarity Corps addressed to young people with a view to contributing to genuine European civic engagement and services; with this aim in mind, asks the Commission and Member States to substantially increase the resources for the European Solidarity Corps; stresses that European standards on volunteering activities, such as financial support for volunteers, insurance, learning, training, inclusion and the principle of no job substitution, must hold sway in any future development of the European Solidarity Corps; insists that the European Solidarity Corps activities can only complement and not be a substitute for national volunteering schemes or civic services;

57.  Considers that the island of Ventotene and its Manifesto have played a decisive role in the history of European integration; stresses its role as an emblematic place of memory for European integration and for the protection of European common values; highlights its contribution to fostering European citizenship education, in particular, through the active involvement of young people in its annual seminar on European integration, initiated by Altiero Spinelli in 1982; stresses also the symbolic importance of the works to reclaim the Carcere di Santo Stefano and its potential to become a centre of reference for permanent cultural exchange, public events, exhibitions and debate; therefore considers it a historical capital of the moral and intellectual construction of European values;

58. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to invest equally in the formal actions of citizenship education and in supporting informal citizenship education, in curricular and extra-curricular activities, and to reinforce EU programmes supporting education and citizenship education; calls for the inclusion in the Recovery and Resilience Facility and the educational programmes financed with EU funds of specific targets related to citizenship education; calls for more financial resources to be allocated to Parliament’s activities, tools and actions related to the promotion of citizenship education across all Member States, in particular Euroscola; calls on the Commission to approve the pilot projects proposed by Parliament, which are designed to strengthen citizenship education; insists on the need for a dedicated budget to develop EU-wide comparable testing in the area of citizenship;

59. Considers the Conference on the Future of Europe a timely opportunity to hold a multilevel discussion on policy development in the area of education, youth and culture; calls on the Member States and the Commission to embrace and take forward the concluding reports of the Conference’s Working Group on Education, Culture, Youth and Sport; believes, therefore, that shared competences in the field of education should be introduced, at a minimum in the field of citizenship education, while the exercise of that competence by the EU ‘shall not result in Member States being prevented from exercising theirs’;

60. Invites the Commission to consider the possibility of supporting the creation, in every municipality in the Member States, of a monument to the European Union to provide citizens with a visual symbol of European integration;

61. Calls on the Member States to strengthen their efforts to implement the Council recommendation of 20 December 2012 on the validation of non-formal and informal learning[23], given how many of the competences obtained through these types of learning are adjacent or complementary to, or outright essential for, the development of civic competences;


° °

62. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.



Date adopted





Result of final vote







Members present for the final vote

Asim Ademov, Ilana Cicurel, Gianantonio Da Re, Laurence Farreng, Tomasz Frankowski, Romeo Franz, Alexis Georgoulis, Catherine Griset, Sylvie Guillaume, Hannes Heide, Irena Joveva, Petra Kammerevert, Niyazi Kizilyürek, Ryszard Antoni Legutko, Predrag Fred Matić, Dace Melbārde, Victor Negrescu, Niklas Nienaß, Marcos Ros Sempere, Monica Semedo, Andrey Slabakov, Massimiliano Smeriglio, Michaela Šojdrová, Sabine Verheyen, Theodoros Zagorakis, Milan Zver

Substitutes present for the final vote

Alexander Bernhuber, Diana Riba i Giner








Dace Melbārde


Asim Ademov, Alexander Bernhuber, Tomasz Frankowski, Michaela Šojdrová, Sabine Verheyen, Theodoros Zagorakis


Ilana Cicurel, Laurence Farreng, Irena Joveva, Monica Semedo


Sylvie Guillaume, Hannes Heide, Petra Kammerevert, Predrag Fred Matić, Victor Negrescu, Marcos Ros Sempere, Massimiliano Smeriglio

The Left

Alexis Georgoulis, Niyazi Kizilyürek


Romeo Franz, Niklas Nienaß, Diana Riba i Giner





Ryszard Antoni Legutko, Andrey Slabakov


Catherine Griset





Gianantonio Da Re


Milan Zver



Key to symbols:

+ : in favour

- : against

0 : abstention

Last updated: 29 April 2022
Legal notice - Privacy policy