He calls on DISY voters to evaluate the two candidates and vote for the one they consider most deserving and capable of running for the Presidency of the Republic, said Christos Pourgourides, a lawyer and former DISY Parliamentary Spokesperson, speaking on the Alpha Kalimera program
When asked to comment on the fact that Averof Neophytou and Giorgos Pamporidis submitted their candidacies in two different ways, he responds and provides a roadmap for the party’s voters.
ΣΧΕΤΙΚΑ ΑΡΘΡΑ
“No two people are alike. Everyone has their own perspective, their own approach. They are both capable individuals. As a longtime party member, a former member of parliament, and a former parliamentary spokesperson for the Democratic Rally, I call on all members—everyone who will go to the polls to vote—to act responsibly toward the party. They should carefully examine the positions of the two candidates—their backgrounds and public service records, as well as their knowledge and abilities. And whoever they consider to be the most worthy and capable of addressing the many problems facing our region, they should vote for that person to be the party’s nominee for the presidential election.”
When asked whether he believes the candidates’ public presence benefits the party, he recalls the reason why the Democratic Rally was founded.
“When political positions aren’t developed in public and political arguments aren’t presented, but rather aphorisms—or, as I often see in some social media posts, insults— that is not dialogue, and it is certainly not dialogue at the level of the Democratic Rally, which, I remind you, was founded in 1976 to bring a new ethos to politics.”
He also refers to the Democratic Rally’s open wounds from the previous elections. “It’s natural for these wounds to create some tension and lead to unnecessary recriminations,” he adds.
Responding to a question about whether he believes the DISY leadership should have been present during the submission of candidacies, Mr. Pourgourides states that he does not attach much importance to this.
“Unlike in previous elections, where decisions regarding the party’s candidate were made by party officials and the leadership, in this election, the decision is made by all members. Consequently, the leadership’s role is limited, because even the party chair has only one vote in the process, just like all the other members. Certainly, her presence would send a message of unity.”
“I am certain that this was not a deliberate omission,” she adds. “It wasn’t considered that her presence would have a more positive impact; because I think, if it had been considered, she would have been present,” he continues.
“An effort is being made to ensure unity, and this must continue. If I have any reservations, it is that the way we discuss problems may not be the best. There must be honesty. We must identify the real causes leading to this situation within the party ranks. Because if we don’t identify the real causes, we won’t find the solution either.”
When asked whether DISY can indeed find its balance, Mr. Pourgourides replied that it is a difficult but not impossible undertaking and “criticized” the indirect statements of support for Christodoulides.
“However, for this to be achieved, there needs to be determination on the part of every party official. It does not exist to the extent that I would like it to. To err is human. What is missing is for each of us to acknowledge our own responsibility for the situation that has prevailed and continues to prevail. Unfortunately, this is not happening to the extent that it should. Some officials come forward and say, for example, that we have no ideological differences with Christodoulides. This immediately suggests that they are indirectly sending a message of support to Christodoulides to many Synergists who hear such remarks. In other words, the differences do exist, and they are enormous. Because when we talk about ideology—and what ideology is, is our beliefs—our beliefs are clearly different. We in Synagermos believe that a member of our faction should not run in an election—let alone for the highest office—outside the party’s procedures.”
He calls on everyone to discuss these issues and not let them linger, so that such phenomena may cease.
And he launches a scathing attack against Nikos Christodoulides.
“Since he was a product of the Democratic Rally and a member of the party, he should have—since he wanted to run for President outside the Democratic Rally—resigned from the Democratic Rally, declared ‘I am leaving the Democratic Rally’ and run for the presidency however he wished. He continued to present himself as a member of the Democratic Rally, boasting that he was a proud member of the Democratic Rally, yet at the same time trampling on the Democratic Rally’s procedures. “That is not ethical politics; it is unacceptable.”
Commenting also on Averof Neophytou’s tactic of not making it clear from the outset whether he would run as a candidate within the DISY procedures, Mr. Pourgourides argues that it served no useful purpose.
“I don’t think the half-truths or the secrecy served any useful purpose. I think it was part of some strategy that I don’t believe helped him in any way. I don’t know why he maintained this stance until the very last moment. But a former party leader could not claim the presidency outside of the party’s procedures. No, that would be unacceptable.”
