The situation inside PASOK resembles a boiling pot once again, triggered by Nikos Androulakis’ decision to have the party vote “present” on the Pleuris amendment, which provides for a three-month freeze on asylum applications for those arriving from Libya to Crete. Behind the scenes, several MPs are silently expressing their anger, speaking of both an institutionally incomprehensible stance and a major political own goal at a critical juncture for the party, while emphasizing that inaction at this stage on such issues is not a solution.
Read: “Present” vote from PASOK on immigration amendment
As MPs told parapolitika.gr, who wish to remain anonymous fearing disciplinary measures against them, it is not possible to vote in favor of unconstitutionality on one hand and declare “present” in the amendment vote on the other.
The same MPs harshly criticize Harilaou Trikoupi street for the fact that the Parliamentary Group and PASOK’s institutional bodies did not convene to decide on the “present” vote on the Pleuris amendment.
At the same time, mid-level party officials point out that when you know well that your opponent has strong (communication) weapons and you are “fighting with slingshots,” you make sure not to make any mistakes, to have transparent and clear positions that do not allow for second interpretations, so that you are not forced to waste your meager communication capital explaining the unexplainable!
Doukas against Androulakis over PASOK’s “present” vote
Haris Doukas directly disagreed with Nikos Androulakis’ decision for the party’s MPs to vote “present” on the Pleuris amendment. Speaking on Action 24 to Giorgos Pierros, the Athens mayor called it “far-right delirium” by the Migration Minister and took a position in favor of voting against the amendment.
When asked if he agrees with PASOK’s decision to vote “present” on the amendment, Mr. Doukas replied on Action24 that while PASOK rightly “differentiated itself from the government,” it “would have been better if the final proposal had been a clear ‘no’.” The Athens Mayor implied that the issue was not put up for discussion in the Political Center, in which he participates along with other top PASOK officials.
Sharp criticism from Kastanidis and Meimaroglu
After Haris Doukas, Haris Kastanidis also criticized Androulakis’ choice to vote present on the Pleuris amendment.
“Today I learned that first you support the unconstitutionality of an amendment and then you vote ‘present’. A lesson in high parliamentary level, solid logic and intelligent guidance,” was the caustic comment by Haris Kastanidis, who has been distancing himself from PASOK’s leadership for some time and often exercises criticism.
Σήμερα έμαθα ότι πρώτα υποστηρίζεις την αντισυνταγματικότητα μιας τροπολογίας και μετά ψηφίζεις “παρών”. Μάθημα υψηλού κοινοβουλευτικού επιπέδου, στέρεας λογικής και ευφυούς καθοδήγησης.
— Kastanidis Haris (@KastanidisHaris) July 11, 2025
There was also a harsh reaction from Giannis Meimaroglu. As a member of PASOK-KINAL’s Political Council, he publicly expresses his disagreement regarding our Parliamentary Group’s stance in the recent parliamentary votes, which he did not have the opportunity to express in the party’s organs.
Specifically, in his statement he argues that PASOK-KINAL should have voted against the proposal for the charge of high treason against New Democracy MPs. “The Left has fought for freedom of expression – including that of its MPs – and has paid dearly for ‘high treason’,” he emphasizes.
He also argues that PASOK-KINAL should have voted against the amendment for the three-month suspension of asylum application examinations. “No retreat from the principles of defending human rights fits in the democratic camp,” notes Mr. Meimaroglu.
Skandamis: “Let everyone reread our principles”
“Deeply concerned” about his party’s stance is Marinos Skandamis, Doctor of Law and former PASOK Justice Sector Leader, characterizing the “present” vote in the related vote on suspending the asylum procedure for refugees arriving in our country as “unhistorical and misguided,” which can be interpreted as inability to formulate a clear position or even as tacit consent to New Democracy’s choices.
Finally, he calls for reaffirmation of PASOK’s fundamental principles regarding human rights, diversity and refugee protection, as reflected in the party’s Constitution.
Criticism from Venizelist officials
Officials who are very close to Evangelos Venizelos also distanced themselves from Androulakis’ choice.
After all, as they say, PASOK could have utilized the scientific criticisms expressed by Evangelos Venizelos, who requested the amendment’s withdrawal by deconstructing it with legal and political arguments.
Indicative of the climate prevailing in the Venizelist bloc is the post made by close friend and associate of the former PASOK president Christos Dervenis.
“Comrades in PASOK, in the government’s greatest far-right – Orban-inspired turn, you don’t respond with ‘present’! We didn’t fight to ‘Remain in Europe’ to fall from Tsipras’ Scylla into Pleuris’ Charybdis! Get serious finally!”, was the comment he wrote on his personal Facebook account.
What Harilaou Trikoupi responds
Responding to criticism directed at it, both within and outside PASOK, Harilaou Trikoupi argues it has a clear position.
It clarifies that the “present” vote from PASOK-Movement for Change “signals that inaction and helplessness are not options. Here there is a real issue that requires effective handling, measures and simultaneously respect for human rights”.
“Active and effective handling of the problem is needed in a completely different direction from what the New Democracy government chose with communication motives,” states a comment from H. Trikoupi, and notes that “the overwhelming majority of those arriving from Libya to Crete are migrants -as the government admits-, the measures of the Pleuris amendment are ineffective”.
