Text · Opinion parliamentary committee
Towards an EU strategy to protect and strengthen the international justice system and its institutions, mechanisms and partners
Document JURI-AD-789891 · 2026/2004(INI)
- Kind
- Opinion parliamentary committee JURI-AD-789891
- Date
- 9 September 2026
- Committee
- Committee on Legal Affairs
- Rapporteur
- Tineke Strik
- Dossier
- 2026-2004
More facts (3)
- Formats
- Official page PDF Word
- Subject matter
- ELSJ, DDLH
- Reference
- 2026/2004(INI)
Text
The text as parsed from the official Word file. Every paragraph has a link (¶) and can be saved to a project as a passage.
The text consists only of the parts below (back matter, procedure pages).
Back matter, 3
Parts that accompany the text rather than belong to it: explanatory statement, annexes, opinions appended by other committees. Collapsed.
Amendments 181 blocks
The Committee on Legal Affairs submits the following to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, as the committee responsible :
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to all international ad hoc tribunals and hybrid/internationalised courts established by the UN, | – having regard to all international ad hoc tribunals and hybrid/internationalised courts established by the UN, in particular the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to coercive measures adopted by the US Government on 9 July and 4 September 2025 affecting United Nations mandate holders, including the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, Francesca Albanese, as well as organisations cooperating with the ICC, including Al-Haq, Al Mezan Center for Human Rights and the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, | – having regard to coercive measures adopted by third countries affecting United Nations mandate holders and civil society organisations cooperating with the ICC, |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the whole-of-government campaign to systematically disable the ICC’s ability to operate that was announced by the US Government on 13 July 2026, |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the preliminary injunction of US District Court Judge Richard Leon for the District of Columbia on halting sanctions against Francesca Albanese on 13 May 2026, | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the Council conclusions of 26 June 2023 on the International Criminal Court on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the adoption of the Rome Statute, |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the joint communication of the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 20 June 2023 entitled ‘European Economic Security Strategy’ (JOIN(2023)0020), |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| A. whereas the EU’s commitment to support international justice is embedded in its external action policies, which aim to uphold human rights and the rule of law; whereas key actions include financing and defending the ICC through existing legal instruments, financing actions related to accountability through the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe, strengthening transitional justice, providing aid for investigations and reparations for victims, supporting Eurojust as well as UN-backed investigative mechanisms, partnering with civil society organisations and strengthening judicial cooperation with non-EU countries; whereas the Blocking Statute Regulation8is a legal tool that can be used to protect stakeholders from the extraterritorial impact of foreign sanctions; | A. whereas the EU’s commitment to support international justice is embedded in its external action policies, in accordance with Articles 3(5) and 21 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), which obliges the EU, in its relations with the wider world, to uphold and promote its values and interests and contribute to the protection of its citizens, as well as to contribute to the strict observance and development of international law; whereas supporting and protecting international justice institutions and mechanisms is an essential component of fulfilling these Treaty obligations; whereas these obligations should require the EU to take effective measures to counter the adverse effects of unilateral coercive measures adopted by a non-EU country and overcompliance practices that undermine international judicial institutions, the rule of law and the rights of EU citizens, in particular those working in support of international justice organisations; whereas key actions to contribute to the development of international law include financing and defending the ICC through existing legal instruments, financing actions related to accountability through the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe, strengthening transitional justice, providing aid for investigations and reparations for victims, supporting Eurojust as well as UN-backed investigative mechanisms, partnering with civil society organisations and strengthening judicial cooperation with non-EU countries; whereas all EU external action, including funding, should be implemented in full compliance with the obligations incumbent on the EU and its Member States on the basis of international law; wheareas Parliament has consistently called on the Commission to strengthen ex ante and ex post assessments and monitoring mechanisms across EU external action; |
| 8 Council Regulation (EC) No 2271/96 of 22 November 1996 protecting against the effects of the extra-territorial application of legislation adopted by a third country, and actions based thereon or resulting therefrom (OJ L 309, 29.11.1996, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/1996/2271/oj). |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Aa. whereas the legitimacy of the rules-based international order, which the EU strongly supports and seeks to safeguard, is dependent on compliance with the orders of international bodies and their effective functioning; whereas discrediting and attacking multilateral organisations has serious consequences, such as the fostering of a culture of impunity; whereas the international community, including the EU, bears responsibility for upholding the rules-based international order1a; whereas the effectiveness and credibility of the international justice system depend on broad international cooperation, adequate resources and sustained support; whereas the EU should pursue policies that strengthen international justice and preserve and build the widest possible international support for accountability and the rule of law; | |
| 1a European Parliament resolution of 21 January 2026 on human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter – annual report 2025 (OJ C, C/2026/3690, 5.8.2026, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/3690/oj). |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Ab. whereas the international legal order is a tool for the peaceful and multilateral resolution of disputes, which must be protected against the growing use of unilateral coercive measures; whereas the EU must act decisively to protect the international institutions working towards this resolution of disputes; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Ac. whereas the system of international justice was significantly shaped by the historical work of international tribunals, in particular the International Military Tribunal (Nuremberg Tribunal) and the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (Tokyo Tribunal), the ad hoc tribunals of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, the mixed hybrid tribunals of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, the Special Tribunal for Lebanon and the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, and the permanent treaty-based institution of the ICC, which have established foundational principles and refined definitions of international crimes, such as through the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia’s clarification of the principle of command responsibility in establishing the three criteria, namely the existence of a superior-subordinate relationship, the mental state of the commander, and the failure of the superior to take the necessary and reasonable measures to prevent or punish1a; | |
| 1a Judgments of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia of 3 March 2000 in Prosecutor v Blaškić (Trial Chamber), paragraph 294, of 26 February 2001 in Prosecutor v Kordić and Čerkez (Trial Chamber), paragraph 401, and of 24 March 2000 in Prosecutor v Aleksovski (Appeals Chamber), paragraph 76. |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| B. whereas Articles 3 and 21 TEU require consistency between the EU’s internal and external action; whereas failure to support international justice mechanisms and to comply with international obligations would undermine the credibility of the EU’s external action; | B. whereas Articles 3 and 21 TEU require consistency between the EU’s internal and external action; whereas advisory opinions and judgments issued by international courts may have legal implications for the EU legal order and for the implementation of EU law and policies; whereas failure to support international justice mechanisms, to comply with international obligations and to ensure consistency between EU action and international law would undermine the credibility of the EU’s external action; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Ba. whereas the EU’s trade and association agreements, and the political dialogue they establish, can provide an effective and non-coercive additional avenue for promoting the universality and integrity of the Rome Statute, respect for the international justice system and the rule of law, and for deepening cooperation with non-EU countries; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D. whereas as a court of last resort, the ICC is fully integrated into the judicial system of all State Parties to the Rome Statute; | D. whereas the ICC operates, under the Rome Statute, on the basis of the principle of complementarity with the national criminal jurisdictions of the States Parties; whereas as a court of last resort, the ICC is fully integrated into the judicial system of all States Parties to the Rome Statute; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Ea. whereas the Rome Statute explicitly describes acts of impediment, intimidation and retaliation directed against ICC officials to influence the performance of their duties as offences against the administration of justice; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Eb. whereas the ongoing coercion against the ICC includes the criminal proceedings and in absentia judgments brought by the Russian Federation against the ICC Prosecutor and judges in connection with the arrest warrant issued by the ICC against Vladimir Putin; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Fa. whereas such coercive measures are unjustified and contrary to the international justice system and the rule of law, constitute a direct attack on the rules-based international order and undermine the principle of jurisdictional independence, the EU’s strategic autonomy and the integrity of its legal order; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Ga. whereas accountability before international courts is essential not only for ending impunity but also for guaranteeing victims’ rights to truth, justice, reparations and guarantees of non-recurrence, in accordance with international human rights law; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| I. whereas banks, insurers and payment providers face risk of fines and exclusion from markets if they maintain or establish relations with the ICC or entities and individuals designated under such coercive measures; whereas this has led to widespread overcompliance by private operators in order to mitigate their exposure to risk; whereas overcompliance and extraterritorial effects manifest in the disruption of essential services to individuals and organisations; | I. whereas banks, insurers, payment service providers and digital service providers may face legal uncertainty when measures by non-EU countries affect their relations with the ICC, entities or persons designated under such coercive measures; whereas this uncertainty may lead to overcompliance and disruption of essential services; whereas economic operators in the EU need clear, proportionate and enforceable guidance that respects the rule of law, legal certainty, economic freedom and their compliance with applicable obligations under EU and Member State law; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| L. whereas the broad complex of existing EU support instruments for international justice should be assessed to identify efficiency gaps, such as the absence of a dedicated comprehensive EU strategy; | L. whereas the broad complex of existing EU support instruments for international justice should be assessed to identify and close efficiency and coordination gaps; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Q. whereas the Annex to Council Regulation (EC) No 2271/96 has not been updated to reflect the most recent developments; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| R. whereas activating the Blocking Statute would manifest the EU’s capacity to preserve the integrity of its legal order against extraterritorial effects of measures taken by non-EU countries and to uphold EU sovereignty; whereas activating the Statute would also represent a powerful symbol of the EU support given to international justice, its operators and partners as well as give substantial support to EU economic actors by providing clear guidelines; whereas a persistent lack of activation could amount to a potential breach of the EU’s obligation as per its cooperation agreement with the ICC; | R. whereas the EU should aim at reducing the structural dependencies that give foreign coercive measures their extraterritorial reach; whereas the Blocking Statute should be considered one key tool under that aim, as it is designed to protect against and counteract the effects of the extra-territorial application of non-EU legislation, and of actions based thereon or resulting therefrom, where such application affects the interests of natural and legal persons engaging in international trade and/or the movement of capital and related commercial activities between the EU and non-EU countries, or where such application causes adverse effects against the interests of the EU and the interests of natural and legal persons exercising their rights under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Developing an EU strategy to strengthen the international system of justice and to protect European sovereignty | Developing an EU strategy to strengthen the international system of justice |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Recalls that respect for the protection and enforcement of international criminal justice through both defensive and positive actions are clear objectives of EU foreign policy; | 1. Recalls that respect for the protection and enforcement of international criminal justice through both defensive and positive actions are clear objectives of EU foreign policy that derive from the fundamental values of the EU, such as the rule of law and respect for human rights; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Considers that such measures and their extraterritorial application are unlawful and constitute interference threatening European sovereignty and have exposed significant gaps and insufficiencies in the EU’s capacity to protect international justice stakeholders and defend EU autonomy; | 4. Considers that such measures and their extraterritorial application are unjustified and contrary to the international justice system and the rule of law, and have exposed significant gaps and insufficiencies in the EU’s capacity to protect international justice stakeholders; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. Reiterates that attempts to intentionally intimidate, impede or retaliate against ICC officials amount to an obstruction of the administration of international justice, prosecutions and the enforcement of victims’ rights; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 6. Calls for a comprehensive assessment of the existing EU tools that support international justice in order to identify and address gaps, such as the absence of a dedicated comprehensive EU strategy, lack of protection mechanisms for sanctioned stakeholders, insufficient regulatory clarity and operational safeguards against overcompliance by private operators, and limited financial predictability for international accountability actors; | 6. Calls for a comprehensive assessment of the existing EU tools, including Council Regulation (EC) No 2271/96, that support international justice in order to identify and address gaps, including the lack of protection mechanisms for stakeholders affected by unilateral foreign coercive measures, insufficient regulatory clarity and operational safeguards against overcompliance by private operators, and limited financial predictability for international accountability actors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 6a. Calls on the Commission to present a comprehensive assessment of the consequences for the EU legal order, including EU actions and policies, arising from relevant decisions and advisory opinions issued by international courts and tribunals1a; calls on the Commission to propose, where necessary, appropriate corrective measures to ensure compliance with its international legal obligations; calls on the Commission to report to Parliament on such measures; | |
| 1a Including the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice of 19 July 2024 on the legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and from the illegality of the continued presence of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. Calls on the Commission and the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, in partnership with Parliament, to propose a comprehensive EU Strategic Framework to respect, protect and strengthen the international justice system and its institutions, mechanisms and partners against unilateral foreign coercive measures and other forms of interference; demands that there be extensive consultation with civil society organisations when preparing such a strategy; | 7. Calls on the Commission and the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, in partnership with Parliament, to ensure the full, consistent and better-coordinated use of current EU instruments and to propose a comprehensive EU Strategic Framework to respect, protect and strengthen the international justice system and its institutions, mechanisms and partners against unilateral foreign coercive measures and other forms of interference; demands that there be extensive consultation with all relevant stakeholders, including civil society organisations, when preparing such a strategy; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Calls on the Commission to adopt an action plan, integrated into the strategic framework, to address every issue arising from the extraterritorial application of unilateral foreign coercive measures, allow sanctioned entities and individuals to retain access to IT providers, bank accounts, insurance and health coverage, and mitigate the risks of fragmented national policies and external dependencies; stresses the need for strengthened interservice cooperation for a consistent EU response in this regard; | 8. Calls on the Commission to follow up on the European Council conclusions of March and June 2026 on upholding international law and to adopt an action plan, integrated into the strategic framework and making full use of current instruments and structures, to address the consequences arising from the extraterritorial application of unilateral foreign coercive measures, in particular by enabling affected entities and individuals to retain access to IT providers, bank accounts, insurance and health coverage, and to mitigate the risks of fragmented national policies and external dependencies; stresses the need for strengthened interservice cooperation for a consistent EU response in this regard; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8a. Stresses that the protection and strengthening of international justice requires sustained engagement with international partners and the building of broad coalitions in support of accountability; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 9. Urges the Commission to activate the EU Blocking Statute as an essential and immediate instrument to counteract the extraterritorial effects of foreign unilateral coercive measures; | 9. Reiterates its repeated calls on and urges again the Commission to activate the EU Blocking Statute in order to protect and safeguard the ICC as an indispensable cornerstone of the international justice system, and also calls on the Commission to continue to monitor and report on the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 2271/96 and to duly inform Parliament and the Council about this; stresses that the EU’s response to the extraterritorial effects of foreign unilateral coercive measures should prioritise reducing the structural, financial, digital and technological dependencies on which those effects rely; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to address the lack of full domestic implementation of the Rome Statute; | 10. Calls on the Commission to support the Rome Statute and on the Member States to ensure the full and effective implementation at national level of the obligations arising from it; reaffirms the centrality of the Rome Statute to the ICC and calls for the EU and the Member States to promote its universality and full and consistent implementation; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10a. Calls on the Commission, the European External Action Service (EEAS) and the Member States to strengthen political dialogue and partnerships with non-EU countries in order to reinforce the universality of the Rome Statute, promote its universal ratification and implementation, support domestic accountability mechanisms and address concerns regarding the perceived selectivity of international justice, through inclusive dialogue based on equal partnership and respect for international law; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11. Urges the Hungarian Government to reverse its withdrawal from the Rome Statute as a matter of priority; | 11. Regrets any withdrawal of a Member State from the Rome Statute and welcomes the Hungarian Government’s decision to reverse its withdrawal from the Rome Statute as a matter of priority; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 12. Reaffirms the centrality of the Rome Statute in the ICC and calls on the European Council to work towards its explicit inclusion in the EU acquis; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 12a. Underlines that international justice mechanisms should be strengthened to ensure access to justice for those who often have no realistic avenue for obtaining justice at national level and are disproportionately affected by international crimes, such as women and girls and other victims of gender-based crimes; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 14. Commends international accountability practices, such as the Eurojust liaison prosecutors’ system and CICED; calls for such instruments to be applied more broadly worldwide; | 14. Calls on the Member States to make full use of the principles of universal jurisdiction and complementarity to investigate and prosecute core international crimes before national courts, and to reinforce the European Network for the investigation and prosecution of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes (Genocide Prosecution Network) within Eurojust; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 15. Calls on the Commission to propose updating Europol’s mandate so that ICC arrest warrants are automatically transferred to and implemented by the executing State; calls for Europol’s immunity system to be aligned with Article 27 of the Rome Statute; | 15. Calls for enhanced cooperation, within existing mandates, to support the swift transmission and execution of ICC arrest warrants by the competent national authorities, in full respect of national judicial procedures; calls for Europol’s immunity system to be aligned with Article 27 of the Rome Statute; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 16. Reaffirms the essential role of the UN in achieving international accountability; calls for the EU and the Member States to strengthen their support to international criminal jurisdictions and investigative mechanisms established by the UN; | 16. Reaffirms the essential role of the UN in achieving international accountability; calls for the EU and the Member States to strengthen their support to international criminal jurisdictions and investigative mechanisms established by the UN or in collaboration with the Council of Europe; welcomes the contribution of Eurojust, Europol and the judicial authorities of the Member States to the investigation of international crimes, and calls for their resources to be reinforced; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19. Stresses that such organisations and individuals, including EU citizens, must be protected effectively against the extraterritorial impact of such coercive measures; calls on the Commission to reduce structural vulnerabilities by developing European independent financial and digital infrastructure, including a sovereign European payment system; | 19. Stresses that such organisations and individuals, including EU citizens, must be protected effectively against the extraterritorial impact of such coercive measures; calls on the Commission to reduce structural vulnerabilities by strengthening the resilience of European financial and digital infrastructures, through competitive, secure and innovation-driven European financial, payment and digital solutions that prevent dependencies on non-EU infrastructure and reinforce the EU’s competitiveness, including an autonomous European payment system; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19a. Calls for the reduction of structural dependencies to be pursued as a strategic priority within the EU’s current economic security and competitiveness agenda, without creating new bodies or budgetary instruments, and fostering innovation and the scaling-up of European providers; stresses that such measures not only protect international justice actors but also reinforce the autonomy and competitiveness of the EU’s financial and technological base as a whole; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 21a. Condemns any unilateral sanction, asset freeze, visa ban or financial restriction measure targeting international judges for acts carried out in the lawful exercise of their judicial functions; condemns economic, administrative or judicial reprisals taken against civil society organisations that document human rights violations or cooperate with international justice mechanisms; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 22. Calls on the Commission to mitigate the legal uncertainty faced by private actors arising from foreign coercive measures by adopting EU guidelines to address overcompliance and by providing protection mechanisms; | 22. Calls on the Commission to mitigate the legal uncertainty faced by private actors arising from foreign coercive measures by adopting practical EU guidance to address overcompliance, drawing on current instruments and EU case-law; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 22a. Calls on the Commission and the Council to establish a monitoring and reporting system to keep under review the implementation of the agreement between the ICC and the EU on cooperation and assistance; recalls the Rome Statute obligations regarding cooperation and assistance and notes that Council Decision 2011/168/CFSP states that ‘the Union and its Member States shall consider the conclusion, as appropriate, of ad hoc arrangements and agreements to enable the effective functioning of the ICC and shall encourage third parties to do so’; calls on the EEAS to establish a monitoring and reporting system whereby the Council and Parliament are informed and briefed on a regular basis of developments relating to the Rome Statute; |
Annex: declaration of input 1 block
The rapporteur declares under her exclusive responsibility that she did not include in hers report input from interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register1, or from representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies, to be listed in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.
Procedure pages and committee votes
How the committees handled the text and how their members voted on it. Collapsed.
Final vote by roll call by the committee asked for opinion 7 blocks
18 · For
- EPP
- Abadía Jover Maravillas, Dahl Henrik, Niebler Angelika, Saudargas Paulius, Voss Axel, Vázquez Lázara Adrián, Wawrykiewicz Michał
- Renew
- Kyuchyuk Ilhan, Sieper Lukas, Žalimas Dainius
- S&D
- Repasi René, Sippel Birgit, Śmiszek Krzysztof, Wölken Tiemo, Wolters Lara
- The Left
- Saeidi Arash
- Greens
- Lagodinsky Sergey, Strik Tineke
7 · Abstained
- ECR
- Fragkos Emmanouil, Mantovani Mario, Yoncheva Elena
- ESN
- Khan Mary
- Patriots
- Diepeveen Ton, Girauta Vidal Juan Carlos, Piera Pascale
Connections
The dossier, the decisions on this text and its other versions.
No connections found for this item.
Sources & citation
Where the facts on this page come from, and how to cite it.
- Data source
- Licensed CC BY 4.0.
- Retrieved
- 25 September 2026
Cite as
European Parliament (2026). “OPINION towards an EU strategy to protect and strengthen the international justice system and its institutions, mechanisms and partners”. Text, 9 September 2026. docId JURI-AD-789891. EU Parl Watch Research. https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/JURI-AD-789891 (retrieved 25 September 2026). Data: EP Open Data API: document record, https://data.europarl.europa.eu/api/v2/documents/JURI-AD-789891 (CC BY 4.0).
BibTeX
@misc{epw-text-juri-ad-789891,
author = {{European Parliament}},
title = {{OPINION towards an EU strategy to protect and strengthen the international justice system and its institutions, mechanisms and partners}},
year = {2026},
date = {2026-09-09},
howpublished = {\url{https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/JURI-AD-789891}},
url = {https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/JURI-AD-789891},
urldate = {2026-09-25},
publisher = {EU Parl Watch Research},
note = {Text. docId JURI-AD-789891. Data: EP Open Data API: document record (CC BY 4.0)}
}