The non-acceptance of the majority democratic decisions of the party by Stefanos Kasselakis was reported, according to information, by the vice-president of the Parliament, Olga Gerovasilis, during today’s meeting of the Political Secretariat.
“When it suited him, the decisions were democratic, when they stopped suiting him, they became diversionary,” said Mrs. Gerovasili.
The vice-president of the Parliament also emphasized that “Stefanos Kasselakis is now throwing threats at the party when he says that his followers will not be gentle and kind at the conference”.
“The party is openly threatened by this side,” he noted.
On the contrary, “we are not all to blame for the current situation in the party, as it is shallowly formulated” explained the vice-president of the Parliament and added that “we have a historical responsibility to defend our principles and values”.
Read also:
Floods in Spain: 62 dead, shock with the cars swept away by the torrents PHOTOS – VIDEO
Achaia: A high school principal is on leave for sexually harassing a student
Patras – Meningitis attack: The student remains in the ICU, strong recommendations from experts to classmates and teachers
Mitsotakis to Steinmeier: The issue of reparations and especially the home loan remain alive
Novartis: The 21 political lawsuits are withdrawn from the file, what is the procedure to be followed
#party #openly #threatened #Kasselakis
**Interview with Olga Gerovasilis, Vice-President of the Parliament**
**Editor:** Thank you, Mrs. Gerovasilis, for joining us. You recently expressed concerns about Stefanos Kasselakis’ response to democratic decisions within the party. Can you elaborate on what you mean by his stance being “diversionary”?
**Gerovasilis:** Certainly. My point is that when the decisions align with his views, they’re deemed democratic. However, when they don’t, he dismisses them as irrelevant. This kind of inconsistency undermines the very foundation of our democratic processes within the party.
**Editor:** That’s a strong statement. You also mentioned that Kasselakis is ”throwing threats” at the party. Could you share more about what he has said that raises alarm?
**Gerovasilis:** Yes, he indicated that his supporters may not be “gentle and kind” at the upcoming conference. This suggests a level of intimidation that is not only unwarranted but dangerous for our party unity. This kind of rhetoric could escalate tensions further.
**Editor:** How do you respond to those who believe that Kasselakis is merely expressing frustrations that many feel within the party? Is there room for negotiation or dialogue?
**Gerovasilis:** While frustration is natural, it’s vital that we channel it positively, rather than through threats. We have a historical responsibility to uphold our principles and values. Open dialogue is always welcome, but it should be grounded in respect for democratic processes rather than coercion.
**Editor:** Given these tensions, what do you think the public and party members will make of this situation? Will it push factions within the party even further apart, or could it foster a more profound dialogue about the party’s direction?
**Gerovasilis:** That’s the crux of the issue, isn’t it? We could either see this as a dividing force or as a catalyst for serious reflection on our values and direction. Diversity of thought is healthy in a democratic setting, but it must be managed constructively. I hope our members see this as an opportunity to reinforce our commitment to democratic norms rather than succumb to threats.
**Editor:** A final question—what message would you like to send to those supporters of Kasselakis who may feel sidelined by the current party leadership?
**Gerovasilis:** I would say that every voice matters in this discourse. But let us use our voices to advocate for unity and constructive change, rather than conflict. We have a shared goal of serving our constituents and upholding our democratic ideals, and that’s where our focus should remain.
**Editor:** Thank you for your insights, Mrs. Gerovasilis. This discussion certainly raises many important questions about the future of the party and its members.