What’s the ‘institutional affront’?
Nikos Androulakis has caused a stir by stating that PASOK will not agree to support a government headed by conservative incumbent Kyriakos Mitsotakis or leftist opposition chief Alexis Tsipras in the event of an inconclusive election. Most of the noise challenges the assumption that the prime minister does not necessarily have to be the head of the party that comes first in the vote: “Wherever did he hear such a thing?” they ask of the socialist leader. The answer is the Greek Constitution – and normally the conversation should end there.
The Greek political system is not one to let anything go, however, not even when it comes to Article 37 of the Constitution, which clearly states that: “The leader of the party having the absolute majority of seats in Parliament shall be appointed Prime Minister. If no party has the absolute majority, the President of the Republic shall give the leader of the party with a relative majority an exploratory mandate in order to ascertain the possibility of forming a Government enjoying the confidence of the Parliament. If this possibility cannot be ascertained, the President of the Republic shall give the exploratory mandate to the leader of the second largest party in Parliament, and if this proves to be unsuccessful, to the leader of the third largest party (…) If all exploratory mandates prove to be unsuccessful, the President of the Republic summons all party leaders, and if the impossibility to form a Cabinet enjoying the confidence of the Parliament is confirmed, he shall attempt to form a Cabinet composed of all parties in Parliament for the purpose of holding parliamentary elections.”
Androulakis’ statement may, therefore, seem outrageous to the political system, but it is in no way an “institutional affront and a challenge to the democratic order,” as Giannis Oikonomou accused the socialist leader. Instead, what is an affront is when the government spokesman said that “the citizens will choose who will be prime minister with their vote.” In parliamentary systems across the world, citizens elect a parliament and the parliament elects a prime minister – the UK, which changed three, is a recent case in point. Otherwise, the president would also be committing an affront to democracy by giving the chiefs of the second and third party the mandate to form a government, if citizens do indeed choose who will be prime minister.
We won’t comment on whether Androulakis’ proposal is good or feasible. What we do know is that it’s fired up the barrage of vapid political TV “debates” when we should be talking about how to fix the country’s problems. Everyone, meanwhile, seems to be worried about who’s going to be prime minister rather than asking who’s going to be transport minister – even as we swear not to repeat past mistakes.
