Koumoundourou returns to the issue of the accusations she receives about a “coup” on the occasion of the Congress and the procedures that were followed, with party sources commenting that “one does not need enormous political experience to realize that if the former President’s side had, not the majority, but also the slightest hope of being even close to a balance of correlations so that he could then complain about “exclusions of delegates” etc., he would have participate in the Conference”.

As they argue, “the paraphilology that is reproduced in the days after the Congress only serves the decision made a long time ago by a small group to leave SYRIZA by forming another party, and which, for this reason, long before the election procedures for the nomination have even started of delegates spoke of a coup, hoods, junta, blockades, schemes, etc. And of course the Congress “reaffirmed” the self-fulfilling prophecy…”.

The same sources note that they are repeating their positions on them “because four days after the Congress, the literature about a “coup d’état” continues, because this literature had started the day after the removal of confidence of the party in the person of former President of SYRIZA, by the deposed President himself”. Moreover, “because, it seems, this philology is now adopted as the “official” assessment of the Congress itself by a section of the media” and “because once again the troublesome SYRIZA is being targeted by spineless friends and opponents”.

Specifically, the sources of the SYRIZA PS state the following:

“1. The total number of delegates elected by the elections to the Member Organizations was 4,262. More than 43,000 members participated in the elections. 3,072 delegates participated in the votes of the Congress and 2,784 voted in favor of the recommendation of the Central Committee. Consequently, 65.3% of the delegates and 90.6% of those who participated voted in favor of the Central Committee’s recommendation. Note that the remaining 34.7% who did not participate are for the most part delegates who probably supported the ousted President, but certainly not all.

2. Regarding the supposed delay in the announcement of the delegates. Never at any Conference were names or the exact number of delegates announced until – most of the time – the first day of the Conference, for the simple reason that delegates must first be certified, objections checked, etc.

3. Regarding “unacceptable” exclusions of delegates. In all Conferences to date, the final certification of the delegates is done by a special committee of the Central Organizing Committee of the Conference. The reason is that in some cases the rules of the nomination of delegates are not respected (such as the gender quota, the number of elected delegates in relation to the number of members or minors, etc.) or because there are objections from other members or for the persons or for the election process, etc. Similar procedures are foreseen in all democratic parties in Greece and internationally.

Indeed, this time more objections were made to specific Member Organizations and more delegates were cancelled, compared to previous Conferences. The reason is that the ousted President’s team attempted, on a nationwide scale, to “give birth” to delegates, in a desperate attempt to reverse a clean sweep against the majority or to cause the cancellation of delegates and then talk of a “coup d’état”, as they did . The announcements of the ousted President, on the night of the elections, with Ceausescu-style “results” (eg “Pella 78-0”) are indicative of the mentality.

Those who are quick to discount the “cancellation of congresses equals coup d’état exclusion” equation will allow us a) to continue to preserve the only democratic way of organizing Congress that exists by following the rules, and b) to point out that the corresponding democratic sensibility has not been demonstrated in the particular complaints by members about the operation by the former President’s side to completely undemocratically distort the election delegates to several Member Organizations.

4. Even so, the number of delegates canceled is so small compared to the numbers of delegates and the clear majority, that even if we assume that these were wrongly canceled, and furthermore that all of them would vote against the recommendation of the Central Committee, voting would not be affected by more than 2%. In other words, the Congress produced a clear, overwhelming majority, and a result that does not admit of the slightest doubt as to the real will of the majority.

If this upsets those who wished to force our party to retain a President or endorse a nomination that the vast majority of members did not want, we are sorry. This is particularly pointed out for those who emphasize that “parties are owned by no one, they are owned only by their members”.

5. Regarding the first day of the Conference. The venue chosen, apart from the fact that it would not accommodate the live presence of all the delegates, turned out to be unsuitable for other reasons as well. But there was no alternative available, unless the congress was adjourned for weeks with a corresponding postponement of the election to elect a new President. And the hybrid format of the Conference was chosen for economic reasons, just like last year in the announcement of the candidates for presidents in the Diarches. It must be emphasized, however, that neither another place nor another date was proposed by the former President, because all he was interested in was how the majority would charge any problem that would appear, as “deliberate trickery”.

It is also true that the world suffered greatly. The whole world, regardless of whether or not they supported the ousted President. The great majority, however, waited patiently until late to enter and receive the delegate card. While others were shouting, shouting, beating and finally left on the order of the former President because they “couldn’t get in”.

However, it is clear that even if the venue was more suitable, it was pre-decided to dissolve the Conference with a massive invasion of delegates and non-delegates, without any observance of the procedure, and if they did not succeed, to leave complaining, as they did. Why? Because they knew they had lost the Conference. The composure of the party and the great majority of delegates avoided the worst”.