Skip to content
Diana RIBA I GINER

Diana RIBA I GINER

GREENS (Greens/European Free Alliance)
Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya

Political Group Memberships

Current GREENS Greens/European Free Alliance
Jul 2024 – Feb 2026 (305 votes)

Group Alignment

How often this MEP votes with their political group majority.

88.7%
Loyalty Rate
267
loyal votes
34
rebellious votes
Aligned Independent

Rebel Subjects

Topics where this MEP most often breaks with their political group.

Common foreign and security policy (CFSP) 4 rebellious votes
Citizen's rights 1 rebellious vote
Fisheries policy 1 rebellious vote

Procedures

178 votes

Resolution seeking an opinion from the Court of Justice on the compatibility with the Treaties of the proposed Partnership Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Common Market of the South, the Argentine Republic, the Federative Republic of Brazil, the Republic of Paraguay and the Oriental Republic of Uruguay, of the other part, and the proposed Interim Agreement on Trade between the European Union, of the one part, and the Common Market of the South, the Argentine Republic, the Federative Republic of Brazil, the Republic of Paraguay and the Oriental Republic of Uruguay, of the other part

Request the Court of Justice to assess the EU-Mercosur agreement's compatibility with EU treaties regarding legal basis and precautionary principle.

21 Jan 2026 2026/2560(RSP)
Did Not Vote

Resolution seeking an opinion from the Court of Justice on the compatibility with the Treaties of the proposed Partnership Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Common Market of the South, the Argentine Republic, the Federative Republic of Brazil, the Republic of Paraguay and the Oriental Republic of Uruguay, of the other part, and the proposed Interim Agreement on Trade between the European Union, of the one part, and the Common Market of the South, the Argentine Republic, the Federative Republic of Brazil, the Republic of Paraguay and the Oriental Republic of Uruguay, of the other part

Request the Court of Justice to assess the EU-Mercosur agreement's compatibility with EU treaties regarding legal basis and precautionary principle.

21 Jan 2026 2026/2560(RSP)
For

Reform of the European Electoral Act – hurdles to ratification and implementation in the Member States

Require Member States to harmonise accessibility of voting for people with disabilities and publicise European parties' affiliations.

20 Jan 2026 2025/2028(INI)
Against

Humanitarian aid in a time of polycrisis – reaffirming our principles for a more effective and ambitious response to humanitarian crises

Increase humanitarian aid funding and prioritise protection for humanitarian workers in conflict zones.

20 Jan 2026 2025/2085(INI)
For

Safeguarding and promoting financial stability amid economic uncertainties

Prioritise a Capital Markets Union agenda to support EU competitiveness without compromising financial stability.

20 Jan 2026 2025/2051(INI)
Abstention

Written Explanations

Written explanations of vote submitted after plenary sessions.

All explanations →
1 explanations
18 Jun 2025 Abstention ES
View procedure →

The Commission’s 2024 Rule of Law report

Me he abstenido en el voto final del informe de la Comisión sobre el Estado de Derecho en 2024 porque contiene una crítica explícita e injustificada a las leyes de amnistía y a los procedimientos de indulto. Esta afirmación desconoce que tanto las amnistías como los indultos son mecanismos plenamente legales y reconocidos en los ordenamientos jurídicos democráticos, incluido el español. Además, el Tribunal Constitucional ha avalado su constitucionalidad, siempre que respeten los principios de proporcionalidad, legalidad y finalidad legítima. Históricamente, estas herramientas han sido clave para resolver conflictos, pacificar situaciones de tensión institucional y corregir desigualdades derivadas de persecuciones políticas o judiciales injustas. Cuestionarlas de forma genérica, como hace el informe, sin analizar su contexto específico, contribuye a estigmatizar soluciones legítimas que permiten avanzar en la convivencia y el respeto de los derechos fundamentales. La crítica del informe ignora también que la Unión Europea no tiene competencia para juzgar el uso de estos instrumentos por parte de los Estados miembros, siempre que se respeten el Estado de Derecho y los valores fundamentales comunes. En lugar de rechazar herramientas democráticas de reconciliación, deberíamos defender su uso cuando buscan reparar injusticias, poner fin a ciclos de represión y promover una paz duradera basada en el diálogo y la legalidad.