The European Parliament President Roberta Metsola has issued a stern rebuke to members of the assembly following a chaotic plenary session marked by racist chants, social-media harassment, and aggressive finger-pointing—a confrontation that has triggered a wider reckoning over the normalization of xenophobic rhetoric inside one of Europe's most visible democratic institutions.
Why This Matters:
• Disciplinary sanctions are now under consideration for MEPs involved in the June incidents, with Metsola meeting one-on-one with those implicated.
• The confrontation follows passage of a stricter return regulation for undocumented migrants, a policy shift that has energized anti-immigration blocs across the continent.
• Civil-society groups warn that such episodes reflect broader trends: online hate speech targeting migrants and minorities has surged across EU member states, including Portugal, where the Council of Europe recently flagged a "sharp increase" in anti-migrant discourse.
• A separate vote in July saw Parliament move to defund the ESN party—potentially stripping it of €3 M in EU grants—for alleged racist, homophobic, and antisemitic statements. ESN (European Conservatives and Reformists) is a right-wing political grouping that includes parties opposing open immigration policies.
A Chamber Divided
Speaking at the opening of this week's plenary in Strasbourg, Metsola drew an explicit red line. "Aggressive chanting, mockery, accusatory gestures, and the filming of colleagues are unacceptable," she told a packed hemicycle (the parliament's circular chamber). "They do not represent this chamber, nor Europe, nor the citizens we all represent."
The rebuke comes after right-wing and far-right groups erupted into "Send them back" chants immediately following the vote on tighter asylum-return rules in June. At the same time, dissenting lawmakers shouted "Shame!" from the opposite benches. The clash was captured on video and rapidly amplified on social media, triggering accusations that the assembly had crossed an ethical threshold.
Metsola acknowledged that votes "can be difficult or controversial," but insisted they "must always be grounded in mutual respect and tolerance." She warned that the behavior witnessed in June "damages the reputation of this House and undermines the values we work so hard to uphold."
Harassment Spills Online
The fallout extended beyond the chamber floor. Abir Al Sahlani, a Swedish liberal MEP born in Iraq, revealed that two ultraconservative colleagues sent her direct messages on social platforms after she criticized the return regulation. One told her to "keep crying"; another suggested she should "go to your own country."
Al Sahlani's account underscores what civil-society organizations have described as a "growing normalization of racist, anti-immigrant, sexist, misogynist, and LGBTI-phobic rhetoric" inside European democratic institutions. Last week, Metsola's chief of staff met with representatives from several non-governmental organizations—including the Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM)—which pressed the Parliament to act decisively.
In a statement this week, PICUM's Chiara Catelli welcomed Metsola's remarks and called for unambiguous messaging. "It must be clear that racism has no place in European democratic institutions," she said.
Sanctions and Precedent
Parliamentary sources confirm that Metsola is holding a series of private meetings with all MEPs involved before determining what penalties—if any—will be imposed. The Parliament's internal rules allow for a range of sanctions, from formal reprimands to temporary suspension of sitting allowances or committee assignments.
The timing is politically sensitive. Just days after Metsola's remarks, MEPs voted to refer the ESN party to the Authority for European Political Parties and Foundations (the body overseeing EU political party funding compliance) over alleged breaches of the EU's founding values. If upheld, that referral could cost ESN roughly €3 M in annual EU funding. Daniel Freund, a Green MEP who spearheaded the motion, argued that "those who incite hatred and violate European values should not be rewarded with public funds."
The dual moves—individual sanctions and institutional defunding—represent the most assertive response yet by the Parliament's leadership to what critics say is an increasingly emboldened anti-immigration bloc.
What This Means for Residents
For people living in Portugal, the row in Strasbourg carries direct implications. The country has emerged as a focal point in broader debates over migration policy, with the Council of Europe's Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) singling out Portugal in its 2025 annual report for a "sharp rise" in online and offline hate speech targeting migrants, Roma, LGBTI individuals, and Black communities.
Portuguese political discourse has not been immune. Disinformation linking migrants to crime or portraying them as a drain on the social-security system has become commonplace in parliamentary debates and local council meetings, according to ECRI's findings. That pattern mirrors a continent-wide shift: in 2024, a coalition of 17 EU member states—which notably did not include Portugal—called for a "paradigm shift" in asylum policy, prioritizing rapid deportations over protection claims. However, Portugal has independently pursued stricter enforcement of asylum procedures in line with the new EU frameworks.
The EU Migration and Asylum Pact, finalized in June 2024, has further tightened the legal framework. While proponents argue it brings coherence to a fragmented system, human-rights monitors warn that provisions allowing accelerated border procedures and expanded detention could erode due-process safeguards. For Portugal, which hosts significant migrant populations from Brazil, Angola, and Cape Verde—communities numbering over 500,000 residents combined—the balance between economic integration and political rhetoric remains precarious. Both Portuguese Parliament debates and municipal governance have increasingly reflected the polarizing tone seen in EU institutions.
The European Commission's 2026–2030 Anti-Racism Strategy, launched in January, aims to strengthen enforcement of existing anti-discrimination laws. For migrants and minorities in Portugal, this includes expanded protections under existing Portuguese equality legislation and EU anti-discrimination directives.
For residents experiencing hate speech in Portugal, resources include:
• ORCID (Portuguese Council for Refugees): Provides legal support and advocacy for migrants facing discrimination
• SOS Racismo Portugal: Accepts reports of racist incidents and provides guidance
• Portuguese Institute for Civil Society (IPSC): Offers information on anti-discrimination protections and legal remedies
• Local municipal authorities increasingly have dedicated offices for migrant integration and complaint handling
A Broader Reckoning
Metsola's intervention reflects a growing recognition that institutional accountability matters. Her pledge of "appropriate measures" is being closely watched by advocacy groups, which argue that consequences for hate speech inside democratic institutions send a clear signal that such rhetoric is unacceptable in public discourse more broadly.
The president framed her remarks around institutional dignity. "As elected representatives, we all committed to act in a manner that respects the dignity this chamber deserves, and that citizens expect of us," she said. "I assure you that we will respond accordingly."
Whether that response will include formal suspensions or simply warnings remains to be determined. What is already clear is that the episode has forced the Parliament to confront how institutional tolerance for hate speech affects the protection of migrants and minorities across Europe—and in countries like Portugal specifically.
For now, Metsola insists the hemicycle "must remain a place where everyone feels safe." As the President continues her rounds of private consultations, the outcome will establish expectations for how EU institutions respond to racist conduct and what standards member states, including Portugal, should uphold in their own chambers.
