Conversion therapy in Europe is once again at the heart of the European political debate. On 29 April 2026, the European Parliament adopted a report on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union in 2024 and 2025. This text did not focus solely on conversion therapy: more broadly, it addressed the rule of law, women’s rights, LGBTIQ+ rights, media freedom, civic space, migration, discrimination and fundamental rights in the European Union.
However, the European Citizens’ Initiative “Ban on conversion practices in the European Union” served as a political lever to ensure that a clear call was included in the report: to urge the European Commission to propose legislation aimed at banning conversion practices in all Member States. The Commission must now respond to this initiative by 18 May 2026.
A European vote, but not yet a ban
On 29 April 2026, MEPs in Strasbourg adopted a report entitled “Situation of fundamental rights in the European Union in 2024 and 2025”, with 328 votes in favour, 199 against and 98 abstentions.
It was in this general report that a key passage on conversion practices was included. Paragraph 57 of the adopted text condemns practices aimed at “changing, suppressing or eliminating” a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression, and calls on the European Commission to submit a proposal for a legal act establishing a ban in all Member States.
This point is crucial: the European Parliament has not adopted an EU law banning conversion therapy. It has adopted a political resolution calling on the Commission to take action. However, within the European Union, it is the Commission that has the power of legislative initiative to propose binding legislation at EU level.
Who is behind the European Citizens’ Initiative?
The European Citizens’ Initiative “Ban on conversion practices in the European Union” was launched by ACT, Against Conversion Therapy, an organisation campaigning against conversion practices. The ECI called on the European Commission to propose legislation banning conversion practices targeting LGBTQ+ people in the European Union.
The initiative has surpassed the threshold required to oblige the Commission to examine it. According to several sources, it gathered more than 1.2 million signatures, bringing the issue back to the forefront of the European agenda. The European Parliament states that the ECI reached the required one million signatures and that the Commission must respond to citizens’ demands by 18 May 2026.
What exactly did the ECI on conversion therapy in Europe call for?
The European Citizens’ Initiative called on the Commission to propose legislation against conversion therapy targeting LGBTQ+ people in the European Union. It went further than a merely symbolic appeal: it also called for these practices to be classified as particularly serious crimes with a cross-border dimension, known as “Euro-crimes”, and for the Victims’ Rights Directive to be strengthened in order to establish minimum standards for the protection, support and assistance of those affected.
At the public hearing held at the European Parliament on 2 March 2026, the ECI was examined by the LIBE Committee, with the participation of the PETI and FEMM Committees. The organisers called for a legally binding ban on practices aimed at changing, suppressing or eliminating a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression.
This call for action comes against a backdrop of inconsistency across Europe. Several Member States already have national legislation in place, but there is still no uniform ban within the European Union. It is precisely this disparity between countries that the organisers of the ECI want to address.
Why are conversion practices at the centre of a European debate?
Conversion practices encompass interventions aimed at changing, suppressing or eliminating a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression. They can take psychological, religious, familial or medical forms, and the organisers of the ECI describe them as discriminatory, degrading, harmful and fraudulent.
According to the European Parliament, the UN has described these practices as a form of torture, and a growing number of countries have already banned them. The European debate therefore centres on dignity, mental health, non-discrimination, victims’ rights and the EU’s competence to legislate on a matter where Member States retain significant responsibility.
The European Commission has already recognised the harmful nature of these practices. Equality Commissioner Hadja Lahbib stated that conversion practices “are not therapies”, that they can cause physical and mental health problems, and that they violate personal dignity. She also indicated that the Commission would work with Member States “with full respect for their competences” and that further data needed to be collected to determine the best course of action.
How the ECI influenced the parliamentary vote
Although the ECI did not produce the report on fundamental rights, it gave strong political momentum to the issue of conversion practices. The European Parliament had already condemned these practices on several occasions since 2016, but the European Citizens’ Initiative set a specific institutional deadline: a formal response from the Commission by 18 May 2026.
This timeline matters. The plenary debate on the ECI took place on 25 March 2026; the public hearing had been held on 2 March; and the report on fundamental rights was adopted on 29 April, containing a paragraph explicitly calling for a European ban.
In other words, the ECI helped set the political agenda. It compelled the institutions to hold a hearing, fuelled the parliamentary debate and enabled a specific request to be included in a general report: that the Commission should turn this public mobilisation into a legislative proposal.
Analysis of votes in the European Parliament
The final vote on 29 April concerned the comprehensive report on fundamental rights, not a separate text dealing solely with conversion therapy. This clarification is essential to understanding how the votes were cast by group.
According to the roll-call data compiled by HowTheyVote based on the Parliament’s official results, the report was adopted by 328 votes in favour, 199 against, 98 abstentions and 94 members not voting. The Social Democrats overwhelmingly supported the text, with 118 votes in favour and none against. Renew Europe also voted unanimously in favour, with 64 votes in favour, as did the Greens/EFA, with 45 votes in favour.
The EPP appears more divided. Its members voted in favour 86 times, against 12 times and abstained 55 times, reflecting a middle-ground stance on a report covering sensitive issues such as LGBTIQ+ rights, sexual and reproductive rights, and the rule of law.
The groups on the right and far right of the Parliament largely rejected the text. Patriots for Europe voted against it 73 times, with no votes in favour, while the European Conservatives and Reformists recorded 70 votes against, 1 vote in favour and 6 abstentions. Europe of Sovereign Nations voted against it 27 times, with no votes in favour and no abstentions.
The case of The Left is particularly worth mentioning. The group had publicly called for a European ban on conversion therapy and for binding legislation across all Member States. However, during the final vote on the comprehensive report, its MEPs were split, with 12 voting in favour, 1 against, 30 abstentions and 3 not voting.
According to a source within The Left, the abstention by part of the group did not relate to the section on conversion therapy, but to the final vote on the report as a whole. The delegation believes that the text was too weak on several fundamental rights issues: restrictions on demonstrations in support of Palestine, what it regarded as an unbalanced treatment of different forms of racism, an inadequate chapter on migration, pushbacks and the criminalisation of solidarity.
The delegation also criticises the report for failing to sufficiently highlight the responsibilities of Member States and for remaining too vague on the protection of civil society, asylum, policing and spyware.
Reactions from MEPs
The rapporteur for the report, Anna Strolenberg, a Dutch MEP from the Greens/EFA group, presented the report as a warning about the general state of fundamental rights in the European Union. She stated that fundamental rights must remain “non-negotiable” and that the question now is whether the European Commission and the Member States have the political will to act.
During the debate on the European Citizens’ Initiative, Marina Kaljurand, an Estonian MEP from the S&D Group and Chair of the European Parliament’s Committee on Petitions, called on the Commission to listen to “the more than one million signatories” and to take “decisive action” against conversion practices.
Among the Greens/EFA, Kim Van Sparrentak, a Dutch MEP, put forward a position that was both personal and political. She stated: “I’m a happily married lesbian. I am not sick”, before calling for an end to these practices, which she describes as acts tantamount to torture.
On the Social Democrats’ side, Marc Angel, a Luxembourgish MEP from the S&D Group, summed up the position in no uncertain terms: “Torture is never therapy”. Juan Fernando López Aguilar, a Spanish MEP from the S&D Group and former Spanish Minister of Justice, argued that such practices contravene Article 4 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which prohibits torture and inhuman or degrading treatment.
Speaking for Renew Europe, Fabienne Keller, a French MEP, stated in French that “these practices are by no means therapies” and asked: “What are we waiting for to ban this practice?”. This position is in line with that of LGBTIQ+ organisations, which are calling for a clear EU-wide ban.
The Left group also supported the ban in principle. Manon Aubry, a French MEP from La France insoumise and co-chair of The Left group in the European Parliament, stated that “the European Union can no longer turn a blind eye” and that conversion therapies must be banned everywhere, immediately. During the parliamentary debate, she also stated: “Being LGBTI is not an illness”, before condemning these “barbaric practices”.
Opposition came mainly from conservative, nationalist and sovereigntist quarters. Paolo Inselvini, an Italian MEP from the ECR Group, said he condemned violence and coercion, but warned against a ban which, in his view, could prevent parents from advising their children. Bert-Jan Ruissen, a Dutch MEP from the ECR Group, argued that abuse was already prohibited and expressed concerns about pastoral conversations.
Reactions from LGBTIQ+ organisations
ACT, the organisation behind the ECI, hailed the vote as a “major victory for the LGBTI+ community in Europe”. The organisation is now calling on the Commission to propose binding legislation covering all forms of conversion therapy, for both children and adults, across all European Union countries.
At the European Economic and Social Committee, Caleb Stocco, a representative of ACT, highlighted the severe and lasting harm caused by these practices and called for a decisive European response. The EESC itself called on the Commission to propose a legally binding European ban, covering both children and adults, which would also prohibit the advertising of these practices, provide for effective sanctions and guarantee support for survivors.
These reactions show that, for the organisations, the Parliament’s vote is a step forward but not the end goal. Their aim remains the adoption of a binding text by the European Union.
And now, what next for conversion therapy in Europe?
The next deadline is now set for 18 May 2026. By that date, the European Commission must provide a formal response to the European Citizens’ Initiative. It will have to state whether it intends to propose legislation, issue recommendations, await the results of its study, or combine several approaches.
The Commission has already confirmed that it is conducting a study on conversion practices, the results of which are expected in early 2027. This study may serve as technical support for future legislation, but it may also be seen as a way of postponing an immediate political decision.
The most ambitious scenario would be a European legislative proposal. This could take the form of an amendment to the Victims’ Rights Directive, an approach specifically addressing hate crimes, or another legal instrument aimed at harmonising minimum standards of protection. Such a proposal would then need to be examined and adopted by the European Parliament and the Council.
A more cautious approach would be to encourage Member States to introduce their own bans, fund organisations, support survivors and incorporate the issue into the European LGBTIQ+ Strategy 2026-2030. This approach would be politically easier, but it would leave significant differences between Member States.
A European battle over fundamental rights
The issue goes beyond the question of conversion therapy in Europe alone. It raises questions about the European Union’s ability to translate public pressure into a common legal standard. It also highlights the political divisions within Parliament on LGBTIQ+ rights, the role of the family, religious freedoms, national competences and victim protection.
For LGBTIQ+ organisations, the vote on 29 April marks a political victory. For the Commission, it creates additional pressure ahead of the 18 May deadline. For opponents, it opens a debate on the limits of a ban and on the EU’s jurisdiction. But for MEPs in favour of the text, the issue is simpler: to assert that no LGBTIQ+ person needs to be “corrected”.
Hadja Lahbib’s statement sums up the crux of the debate: conversion practices “are not therapies”. It now remains to be seen whether the European Commission will turn this position into legislation.
Sources
- European Parliament, press release: “Parliament sounds the alarm over the state of fundamental rights in the EU”, published on 29 April 2026. Available here: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20260423IPR41840/parliament-sounds-the-alarm-over-the-state-of-fundamental-rights-in-the-eu
- European Parliament, adopted text, PDF: “P10_TA(2026)0146, Situation of fundamental rights in the European Union in 2024 and 2025”. Available here: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-10-2026-0146_EN.pdf
- European Parliament, public hearing: “Public Hearing on the European Citizens’ Initiative to Ban Conversion Practices”. Available here: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/public-hearing-on-european-citizens-init/product-details/20260210CHE13622
- European Parliament, plenary debate: “Verbatim report of proceedings, Wednesday, 25 March 2026”. Available here: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CRE-10-2026-03-25_EN.html
- European Parliament, ECI announcement: “An EU ban on LGBTQ+ conversion practices: MEPs to discuss Citizens’ Initiative”. Available here: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/agenda/plenary-news/2026-03-25/10/an-eu-ban-on-lgbtq-conversion-practices-meps-to-discuss-citizens-initiative
- HowTheyVote, voting database: “The state of fundamental rights in the European Union in 2024 and 2025”. Available here: https://howtheyvote.eu/api/votes/190917
- The Left, policy statement: “The Left calls for a ban on conversion therapy in the EU”. Available here: https://left.eu/the-left-calls-to-ban-conversion-practices-in-the-eu/
- European Economic and Social Committee, press release: “EESC firmly rejects conversion practices, which are regarded as hate crimes, and fully supports the EU LGBTIQ+ Equality Strategy”. Available here: https://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/news-media/press-releases/eesc-firmly-rejects-conversion-practices-seen-hate-crimes-and-fully-backs-eu-lgbtiq-equality-strategy
- The Brussels Times, press article: “EU pushes to ban conversion therapy for LGBTQ+ citizens”. Available here: https://www.brusselstimes.com/eu-affairs/1783688/eu-pushes-to-ban-conversion-practices-for-lgbtq-citizens/
- Attitude, press article: “EU moves closer to so-called conversion therapy ban”. Available here: https://www.attitude.co.uk/news/eu-moves-closer-so-called-conversion-therapy-ban-521476/
- Malta Daily, press article: “EU Parliament backs ban on conversion therapy”. Available here: https://maltadaily.mt/articles/european-parliament-votes-to-ban-conversion-therapy
