The announcement by Ilias Kasidiaris regarding the support of the “Alliance of Greeks” and the announcement of his candidacy in the elections (if permitted by the Supreme Court) constitutes, in practice, a new development on the country’s political scene, which the government is called upon to handle with particular caution, at a time when similar far-right political forces are gaining strength in several European countries.The strengthening of AfD in Germany is one of the most characteristic examples of the shift in political balances, while still fresh is the survey that recorded that nearly one in four European voters now supports parties from this specific ideological space, with significant increases in France, Austria, and Portugal.
In this environment, the government has put Ilias Kasidiaris’s next moves under the microscope, without, as emerges from its public statements, treating the issue only in terms of electoral arithmetic.
This dimension was raised by government spokesperson, Pavlos Marinakis, on the occasion of the political developments in Germany. He stressed that each country has its own particularities, but underlined that the political response must be effectiveness, argumentation, and the resolution of citizens’ problems, so that “through our stance, through our policy, through our style” the turn toward extreme forces is discouraged.
This position takes on additional interest after the publication of the new nationwide survey by Palmos Analysis (for TheOpinion), according to which, in the hypothetical question about a new party under Ilias Kasidiaris, 8% answer that they would vote for it “definitely” and 9% that they “might” vote for it.
Although the reference is to a potential pool of voters, the announcement of the “Alliance of Greeks” by Kasidiaris now turns what until recently was a hypothetical scenario into an existing political venture.
Institutional framework
The assessment is that the former deputy leader of Golden Dawn may win votes from other anti-system parties, but also mobilize people who would not vote at the ballot box.
The government refers to the institutional framework that has already been created after the conviction of the leadership of Golden Dawn and makes clear that no new legislative intervention is needed.
The former minister, Makis Voridis, underlined (on ANT1) that, if the involvement is established in the leadership of a party of a person who has been convicted for directing a criminal organization, the A1 Section of the Supreme Court has specific jurisdiction regarding the proclamation of electoral combinations.
Different, according to him, is the issue of the simple candidacy of a convicted person in an electoral combination. It is, therefore, a matter that will be judged institutionally and judicially, based on the actual data that will be submitted when the time for candidacies comes.
From the Maximos Mansion, the message being sent is twofold. On the one hand, institutional vigilance against any attempt at the reappearance of Golden Dawn or persons who have been convicted of criminal acts. On the other hand, political handling of the social and economic causes that can fuel the protest vote and the attraction of voters by extreme political formations.
Mr. Marinakis even attempted to distinguish the handling of criminal acts from the confrontation of ideologies, noting that the government is the one that, as he argued, completed the trial of Golden Dawn and proceeded with the legislative interventions that allowed the supreme court to examine the participation in elections of parties under specific conditions.