SYRIZA: “The Rise and Fall of Kasselakis Amidst a Coup Unveiled

The removal of Stefanos Kasselakis from the presidency of SYRIZA – Progressive Alliance is a “coup” according to his supporters.

It is the first time in Greek post-political history that a party president has been removed from his position, after the members of the political organization to which he belongs voted in favor of a motion of censure against him. And this, before one year has even passed since assuming the leadership, in which he emerged with a percentage of 56%.

It is characteristic that today the member of parliament, Petros Pappas, spoke of “a diversion that does not honor any party”, adding that “this does not happen even in third world countries.

THE SYRIZA it gives the image of a non-serious party with what happened. At this moment the will of the world, which is enraged, is being overturned. Since yesterday I have received hundreds of angry messages from people, the will of the party’s voters on who they want as leader has been overturned in a violent way.”

So let’s take a detailed look at what happened over the weekend and especially those points where the “Casselists”, the supporters of the 36-year-old politician, have objections.

In the framework of the meeting of the Central Committee on Saturday night, the group of “87” (which is close to Alexis Tsipras) submitted the request for the motion of impeachment against the president of the party. In fact, the relevant vote was initially planned to be held the same evening, however there were disagreements about the way it was conducted.

Secret or open voting?

A key point of contention was whether voting should be secret or open. The controversies that broke out in the Central Committee on this issue were intense, and the final decision on this issue seems to have decided the whole “game”.

On the one hand, the group of “87”, which was notably supported by Pavlos Polakiswas pushing for the voting to be carried out under secrecy, while on the other hand, o Stefanos Kasselakis and the executives who sided with him wanted it to be made public. Finally, in order to break the deadlock, it was decided to hold an initial vote – also secret – to decide how the final vote would be conducted.

This process led to the decision for a secret ballot in the end, with those present voting 122 in favor and 90 against. Thus, the polls were set up on Sunday morning, a development that was an important victory for the “87” team and Pavlos Polakis, as they managed to impose the secrecy they desired. For his part, Stefanos Kasselakis, who wanted the vote to be transparent, found himself at a disadvantage and began to realize that the correlations are probably not in his favor.

However, there was one detail that undermined the secrecy of the process: the decision concerned only those present in the room, while those absent were able to vote by telephone, which directly questioned the true secrecy of the vote.

On Sunday morning, when the vote was finally held, the motion of censure was upvoted with a significant majority. Specifically, 163 members of the Central Committee voted in favor of the censure, while 120 opposed.

In addition, two blank and one invalid ballot were found. It is worth noting that in order for the motion of censure to pass, according to the Statute, 50% plus one vote of the members of the Committee was required, that is, at least 148 votes. Out of the 295 members of the Commission, a total of 286 voted, with 76 voting by telephone, while there were also nine abstentions from the process.

This is where the main peculiarity of this process can be found. Despite the fact that the decision of the Central Committee stipulated a secret ballot, the telephone participation of absent members made it partially public. Specifically, a three-member committee undertook to contact by phone the 85 members who were not present in the room, of which 76 responded and voted.

The presence of these three committee members during the telephone vote, combined with the lack of any oath of secrecy, created a peculiar situation where the secrecy of the proceedings could not be fully ensured. In fact, there were reports that some SYRIZA executives, supporters of Kasselakis, were approached by Pavlos Polakis’ group and eventually voted to impeach, reinforcing the image of a wider defeat for Mr. Kasselakis.

When did the climate change?

The outcome of the vote came as a surprise to many, as until a few days ago, the result seemed inconclusive.

However, the atmosphere changed after Stefanos Kasselakis’ speech to the Central Committee on Saturday, which was seen as particularly divisive. Many members who initially maintained a neutral stance or even supported the president, felt that his speech intensified divisive tendencies within the party and removed any possibility of compromise. As a result, several of these neutral members decided to support the motion of censure.

According to newsbeast, the pressure for a change of attitude may also be due to the latest opinion polls, which show SYRIZA recording a significant drop, now in fifth place, behind PASOK, the Hellenic Solution and the KKE. This may have worked as a catalyst for some members of the Central Committee, who, worried about the future course of the party, decided to support the motion of censure, believing that a change of leadership could bring about a reversal of the situation.

The Central Committee is a delegitimized body

Finally, it should be noted that the supporters of Mr. Kasselakis consider that the Central Committee is a delegitimized body and “should not exist” as the MP Kilkis of the party, Petros Pappas, pointed out today in his radio interview. According to him, “this is a body that was elected in 2022, so its term has expired. And it has ended because a conference intervened, where new members of the body had to be elected.

Too many of its current members are replacements.” In other words, these are the 4th or 5th substitutes who joined the body, because the key members had left the Central Committee after the split that occurred and resulted in the formation of the New Left party. “In other words, people who were elected with 5 or 10 votes are now members of the party’s Central Committee,” he says.

Read also:

EMY upgrades severe weather emergency for Atena, hazardous conditions tonight through Wednesday, see where

Orgy of tax evasion by olive mills, in the circuit companies from Achaia and Ilia

Lignadis: “It’s offensive to real rape victims to put someone in jail because we don’t like them” VIDEO

SYRIZA: The 7th floor in Koumoundourou was emptied, Kapnisakis also resigned

What were the main reasons behind the censure motion against Stefanos Kasselakis in​ SYRIZA? ‌

The ⁣Removal of Stefanos Kasselakis from SYRIZA: A “Coup” or a Democratic Decision?

In a historic and unprecedented move, Stefanos Kasselakis, the president ⁢of SYRIZA ‍- Progressive⁣ Alliance, has been removed⁢ from his ⁣position after a motion of censure was voted in favor by the​ party’s Central Committee. This decision ⁤has sparked controversy and outrage among Kasselakis’ ​supporters, who⁤ have labeled ⁢it​ a “coup” and⁣ have raised questions‍ about‍ the legitimacy of the process.

The ⁢Background

Stefanos Kasselakis, a 36-year-old politician, was elected⁤ as the president of SYRIZA with a staggering 56% of the vote, just a year ago. However, his ⁣leadership has been dogged by⁤ controversy and ⁤criticism from ​within the party. The group of “87”, led by Alexis Tsipras, submitted a motion⁣ of impeachment against Kasselakis, which was initially planned to be voted ⁣on ⁢during​ the Central‌ Committee meeting on Saturday night.

The Controversy‍ over Secret ⁤Voting

One of the key points of contention was whether the voting should be secret or ⁣open. The ‌group of “87”​ pushed for secrecy, while Kasselakis and his supporters wanted an open vote. After intense debates, ​it ‍was decided to‌ hold an initial secret vote to determine how⁢ the final vote would be conducted. This process⁣ led to the decision for a secret ballot, with 122 members voting in favor and 90 against. However, the decision was later questioned due‌ to the partial​ public ‌nature⁢ of the vote, as absent members were ‌able to vote by telephone.

The Vote and Its​ Aftermath

On Sunday morning, the ‌motion of censure was​ voted in favor ⁤with a significant⁤ majority, with 163 members supporting the motion and 120 opposing.​ The outcome came as a surprise to many, as it was initially believed that the result would be inconclusive.‌ However, Kasselakis’ speech to the Central Committee on⁣ Saturday,⁣ which⁣ was seen⁤ as divisive, may have contributed to ​the change in atmosphere.‌ Additionally, recent opinion polls showing SYRIZA’s decline in popularity ‌may have also influenced the decision.

The​ Central ⁢Committee’s Legitimacy

Kasselakis’ supporters have questioned the legitimacy of the Central Committee, claiming that it is a delegitimized body that should not ‍exist. According to Petros Pappas, an MP from⁤ Kilkis, the Central Committee’s term has expired, and many ​of ‌its⁤ current members are⁤ replacements who were not originally elected.

Who is Stefanos Kasselakis?

Stefanos ⁤Kasselakis is a Greek politician who ‍has been at⁤ the helm of ⁤SYRIZA since 2023. Born on March 29, 1988, in Amarousio, Greece, ​Kasselakis has a background in finance, having worked at Goldman Sachs before entering politics [1[1[1[1[1[1[1[1]. He has been described as young,

What were the key events that led to the removal of Stefanos Kasselakis from the presidency of SYRIZA – Progressive Alliance?

The Removal of Stefanos Kasselakis from the Presidency of SYRIZA – Progressive Alliance: A Coup or a Democratic Decision?

In a historic move, Stefanos Kasselakis, the 36-year-old leader of SYRIZA – Progressive Alliance, has been removed from his position after a motion of censure was approved by the Central Committee of the party. This decision has sparked controversy and outrage among Kasselakis’ supporters, who are calling it a “coup” and questioning the democratic legitimacy of the process.

The events that led to Kasselakis’ removal began on Saturday night, when the Central Committee of SYRIZA met to discuss a motion of impeachment against the party leader. The motion was submitted by the “87” group, which is close to Alexis Tsipras, the former Prime Minister of Greece and founder of SYRIZA. The group, supported by Pavlos Polakis, argued that Kasselakis had failed to lead the party effectively and had lost the trust of its members.

One of the key points of contention was whether the voting should be secret or open. Kasselakis and his supporters wanted a public vote, while the “87” group and Polakis pushed for a secret ballot. After intense debates, it was decided to hold an initial secret vote to decide how the final vote would be conducted. The decision was in favor of a secret ballot, with 122 members voting in favor and 90 against.

On Sunday morning, the final vote was held, and the motion of censure was approved with a significant majority. 163 members of the Central Committee voted in favor of the censure, while 120 opposed. Two blank and one invalid ballot were also found. According to the party’s statute, a minimum of 148 votes was required for the motion to pass.

The process, however, has been criticized for its lack of transparency. Despite the decision for a secret ballot, the telephone participation of absent members made it partially public. A three-member committee contacted the 85 members who were not present in the room, of which 76 responded. This has raised concerns about the true secrecy of the vote.

Kasselakis’ supporters have been vocal in their opposition to the decision, with some calling it a “coup” and a “diversion that does not honor any party.” Petros Pappas, a member of parliament, expressed his outrage, saying that “this does not happen even in third-world countries.” He added that the will of the party’s voters has been overturned in a violent way.

The reasons behind the censure motion against Kasselakis are multifaceted. According to sources, Kasselakis’ leadership style and decision-making process were seen as authoritarian and undemocratic. His supporters, on the other hand, argue that he was being targeted by the “old guard” of SYRIZ