Thijs REUTEN
Political Group Memberships
Voting Statistics
Group Alignment
How often this MEP votes with their political group majority.
Rebel Subjects
Topics where this MEP most often breaks with their political group.
Procedures
175 votesResolution on the urgent need to protect religious minorities in Syria following the recent terrorist attack on Mar Elias Church in Damascus
Demand that Syrian authorities investigate attacks, protect religious freedom, and hold perpetrators accountable.
Resolution on the arbitrary arrest and torture of Belgian-Portuguese researcher Joseph Figueira Martin in the Central African Republic
Demand the immediate release of Joseph Figueira Martin, detained arbitrarily in the Central African Republic, and ensure his medical evacuation.
Resolution on the human cost of Russia’s war against Ukraine and the urgent need to end Russian aggression: the situation of illegally detained civilians and prisoners of war, and the continued bombing of civilians
Demand Russia end military activities, release Ukrainian detainees, and compensate victims of war crimes in Ukraine.
Implementation and delivery of the Sustainable Development Goals in view of the 2025 High-Level Political Forum
Condition external action funding on achieving gender equality targets.
2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Georgia
Impose sanctions on Georgian individuals responsible for undermining democracy and review Georgia's visa-free status due to democratic backsliding.
Written Explanations
Written explanations of vote submitted after plenary sessions.
Drones and new systems of warfare – the EU‘s need to adapt to be fit for today‘s security challenges
GL-PvdA supports this report, as it offers valuable perspectives on adapting the Member States’ armed forces, EU programmes and institutions to challenges in relation to the integration of drones, anti-drone measures and other innovative systems of warfare. The geopolitical situation and swift changes in global alliances merit supporting the overall report. However, GL-PvdA explicitly distances itself from the Frontex references in paragraphs 39, 323 and 324. We strongly oppose this report’s language advocating for an of Frontex mandate expansion, to include military capabilities and tasks, which dangerously blurs the line between defence and border management. Due to previous human right abuses by Frontex, affording quasi-military powers entails significant risks, and requires a radical shift in its modus operandi, oversight, and legal framework. While limited information exchange between Frontex and armed forces, in line with data protection and fundamental rights obligations, may be pertinent, the mandate for territorial defence must remain the exclusive responsibility of our armed forces, that have clearly defined democratic and legal frameworks. Moreover, the European Commission foresees a revision of the Frontex Regulation in 2026. Taking a Parliamentary position on such a sensitive matter is premature.
No written explanations available.