Archibishopic elections system
26 posts
• Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Archibishopic elections system
by Sotos » Mon Sep 25, 2006 3:48 pm
This is system is so messed up they are still counting and re-counting!! I think it is unfair also. Nicosia + Famagusta elect 50 representatives while Limasso, Paphos, Larnaca, Kerynia and Morfou each elect 10. How can Limassol elect the same number of representatives like the other districts that are much smaller?!
-
Sotos - Leading Contributor
- Posts: 11357
- Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 2:50 am
by cypezokyli » Mon Sep 25, 2006 4:41 pm
well the system is unfail....but well its a church system....
but the additional mess of counting and recounting has nothing to do with the system itself
but the additional mess of counting and recounting has nothing to do with the system itself
- cypezokyli
- Regular Contributor
- Posts: 2563
- Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 6:11 pm
- Location: deutschland
by michalis5354 » Mon Sep 25, 2006 8:57 pm
Everything on time ! excellent organisation! Efficient procedures! Very fair system ! A lesson for other countries to learn!
-
michalis5354 - Regular Contributor
- Posts: 1521
- Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 10:48 am
by Svetlana » Tue Sep 26, 2006 2:06 pm
Church elections end in ballot chaos
By Elias Hazou
THE FIERCELY contested elections to choose a new leader for the Church of Cyprus descended into chaos after a number of ballot boxes arrived for counting late, empty or appeared to have been tampered with.
Some of the problematic ballot boxes – 65 in total – were not sealed, while others contained voting slips that did not correspond to the accompanying manifest. Others still lacked the necessary signature of the supervisor of the polling station.
Because of the irregularities, election officials suspended counting twice late on Sunday. By that time the counting centre in Nicosia was in a shambles, with many voting slips strewn on the floor as tempers flared between the representatives of the candidates.
At around 4.30am yesterday a visibly exhausted Chief Returning Officer Ioannis Charilaou decided to call it quits.
Votes counted before the problems emerged pointed to victory for Athanassios, a monk seen as a gifted spiritual leader by supporters and a fundamentalist by detractors.
By the early hours of yesterday only 290 out of the 401 districts were counted, meaning the final result could yet swing in favour of Athanassios’ main rival, bishop Nikiforos of Kykkos.
But despite the mayhem, Paphos bishop Chrysostomos, the caretaker of the Church, ruled out cancelling the election.
“There is no way the elections will be repeated. Forget it,” the bishop told journalists.
However, the election process could be repeated only for the problematic polling stations, he added.
“Yes, there were certain mishaps, but not to the extent of altering the result,” said Chrysostomos.
Vote counting resumed yesterday afternoon, and the final results were expected in the early hours of today.
Chrysostomos said that any objections would be examined during a session of the Holy Synod, which he would convene on Friday.
But campaign staffers for the Kykkos bishop blamed Chrysostomos for the mess, barely stopping short of saying outright that election tampering had taken place.
Andros Pavlides, a spokesman for the Kykkos bishopric, said Chrysostomos was not even at the counting centre to oversee the process.
“OK, he has admitted that mistakes happened. So what does he want from us – to thank him on top of it?”
Still, Pavlides forecast that Nikiforos would win the next round of voting “by a wide margin.”
But another Nikiforos staffer was more outspoken, accusing the bishop of Paphos of attempting to hijack the elections.
“With all due respect, Holy Paphos must choose: he cannot be both the supervisor of the elections and a candidate at the same time. We shall not stand for any trickery,” he said.
He cited one case where a ballot box in Paphos – Chrysostomos’ turf – was sealed, the result confirmed, only for a certain representative to pose an objection half an hour later. The box was reopened, counted again and the initial result – which saw Nikiforos win – overruled.
He also debunked Chrysostomos’ insinuation that Nikiforos’ cohorts were up in arms because things were not going their way in the count.
“Not at all, you will see that Nikiforos will win. We are positive.”
Rumours of corruption surfaced in the run-up to Election Day, after Chrysostomos said he would not make use of the services of the police, whose job was to safely escort ballot boxes from the districts to Nicosia. The bishop’s opponents had suggested that would make it easier for anyone to tamper with the boxes.
Chrysostomos later changed his mind.
The first stage saw registered voters elect 1,400 representatives who, in turn, will select 100 others. That group of 100 Electors will then be joined by 33 ex officio clerics, voting separately for a new Archbishop by secret ballot.
That means that if a candidate secures 55 to 60 of the 100 Electors he is halfway there.
However, the distribution of Electors is weighted heavily for the Archbishopric district, which nominates 50 of the 100 Electors, the rest of the districts each nominating 10.
In this sense, the system is similar to the US presidential elections, where the winner is not necessarily the person who gets the popular vote.
To win, a candidate must secure a majority in both ballots – Electors and ex officio clerics – otherwise the stage is repeated between the two candidates receiving the most votes.
Athanassios’ camp were more subdued, saying they blamed no one for the situation, which they attributed to “misunderstandings.”
Even without the glitches, the complex process was expected to end by November. These are the first Church elections in 29 years.
Copyright © Cyprus Mail 2006
By Elias Hazou
THE FIERCELY contested elections to choose a new leader for the Church of Cyprus descended into chaos after a number of ballot boxes arrived for counting late, empty or appeared to have been tampered with.
Some of the problematic ballot boxes – 65 in total – were not sealed, while others contained voting slips that did not correspond to the accompanying manifest. Others still lacked the necessary signature of the supervisor of the polling station.
Because of the irregularities, election officials suspended counting twice late on Sunday. By that time the counting centre in Nicosia was in a shambles, with many voting slips strewn on the floor as tempers flared between the representatives of the candidates.
At around 4.30am yesterday a visibly exhausted Chief Returning Officer Ioannis Charilaou decided to call it quits.
Votes counted before the problems emerged pointed to victory for Athanassios, a monk seen as a gifted spiritual leader by supporters and a fundamentalist by detractors.
By the early hours of yesterday only 290 out of the 401 districts were counted, meaning the final result could yet swing in favour of Athanassios’ main rival, bishop Nikiforos of Kykkos.
But despite the mayhem, Paphos bishop Chrysostomos, the caretaker of the Church, ruled out cancelling the election.
“There is no way the elections will be repeated. Forget it,” the bishop told journalists.
However, the election process could be repeated only for the problematic polling stations, he added.
“Yes, there were certain mishaps, but not to the extent of altering the result,” said Chrysostomos.
Vote counting resumed yesterday afternoon, and the final results were expected in the early hours of today.
Chrysostomos said that any objections would be examined during a session of the Holy Synod, which he would convene on Friday.
But campaign staffers for the Kykkos bishop blamed Chrysostomos for the mess, barely stopping short of saying outright that election tampering had taken place.
Andros Pavlides, a spokesman for the Kykkos bishopric, said Chrysostomos was not even at the counting centre to oversee the process.
“OK, he has admitted that mistakes happened. So what does he want from us – to thank him on top of it?”
Still, Pavlides forecast that Nikiforos would win the next round of voting “by a wide margin.”
But another Nikiforos staffer was more outspoken, accusing the bishop of Paphos of attempting to hijack the elections.
“With all due respect, Holy Paphos must choose: he cannot be both the supervisor of the elections and a candidate at the same time. We shall not stand for any trickery,” he said.
He cited one case where a ballot box in Paphos – Chrysostomos’ turf – was sealed, the result confirmed, only for a certain representative to pose an objection half an hour later. The box was reopened, counted again and the initial result – which saw Nikiforos win – overruled.
He also debunked Chrysostomos’ insinuation that Nikiforos’ cohorts were up in arms because things were not going their way in the count.
“Not at all, you will see that Nikiforos will win. We are positive.”
Rumours of corruption surfaced in the run-up to Election Day, after Chrysostomos said he would not make use of the services of the police, whose job was to safely escort ballot boxes from the districts to Nicosia. The bishop’s opponents had suggested that would make it easier for anyone to tamper with the boxes.
Chrysostomos later changed his mind.
The first stage saw registered voters elect 1,400 representatives who, in turn, will select 100 others. That group of 100 Electors will then be joined by 33 ex officio clerics, voting separately for a new Archbishop by secret ballot.
That means that if a candidate secures 55 to 60 of the 100 Electors he is halfway there.
However, the distribution of Electors is weighted heavily for the Archbishopric district, which nominates 50 of the 100 Electors, the rest of the districts each nominating 10.
In this sense, the system is similar to the US presidential elections, where the winner is not necessarily the person who gets the popular vote.
To win, a candidate must secure a majority in both ballots – Electors and ex officio clerics – otherwise the stage is repeated between the two candidates receiving the most votes.
Athanassios’ camp were more subdued, saying they blamed no one for the situation, which they attributed to “misunderstandings.”
Even without the glitches, the complex process was expected to end by November. These are the first Church elections in 29 years.
Copyright © Cyprus Mail 2006
-
Svetlana - Main Contributor
- Posts: 3094
- Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 9:30 pm
- Location: Paphos
.jpg)
by Bananiot » Tue Sep 26, 2006 4:35 pm
Not quite sotos.
The representatives that were elected on Sunday (1400) get together within 21 days and select a smaller body of 100 so called general representatives. It appears, Nikiphoros has 45, Athanasios 45 and Chrysostomos the Paphian 10. They will vote and a ranking order will be decided ie Athanasios first, Nikiphoros second and Chrisostomos third. Athanasios will not be the new Archbishop yet.
Another ballot will be set parallel to the one the general representatives will vote at. This ballot will be for 33 previleged clergy (havn't the faintest who picks them, probably Chrysostomos who substituted for the ailing Archbishop). Athanasios, who came first in the ballot of the general representatives must get the majority in the second ballot, for the priveled clergy. Will he? Apparently not. This is where Chrysostomos reigns supreme.
Now, a third ballot will be set between the winner of the second one (Athanasios) and the third one (Chrysostomos). Thus, the question that begs asking is for whom the 45 representatives of Nikiphoros will vote for. What do you think? And what about if Nikiphoros makes it to the final ballot? For whom will the Athanasios representatives vote? One thing is certain. Chrysostomos will be in the final vote, with, either Athanasios or Nikiphoros.
Byzantine intriques? Youir call!
The representatives that were elected on Sunday (1400) get together within 21 days and select a smaller body of 100 so called general representatives. It appears, Nikiphoros has 45, Athanasios 45 and Chrysostomos the Paphian 10. They will vote and a ranking order will be decided ie Athanasios first, Nikiphoros second and Chrisostomos third. Athanasios will not be the new Archbishop yet.
Another ballot will be set parallel to the one the general representatives will vote at. This ballot will be for 33 previleged clergy (havn't the faintest who picks them, probably Chrysostomos who substituted for the ailing Archbishop). Athanasios, who came first in the ballot of the general representatives must get the majority in the second ballot, for the priveled clergy. Will he? Apparently not. This is where Chrysostomos reigns supreme.
Now, a third ballot will be set between the winner of the second one (Athanasios) and the third one (Chrysostomos). Thus, the question that begs asking is for whom the 45 representatives of Nikiphoros will vote for. What do you think? And what about if Nikiphoros makes it to the final ballot? For whom will the Athanasios representatives vote? One thing is certain. Chrysostomos will be in the final vote, with, either Athanasios or Nikiphoros.
Byzantine intriques? Youir call!
-
Bananiot - Main Contributor
- Posts: 6397
- Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 10:51 pm
- Location: Nicosia
by cypezokyli » Tue Sep 26, 2006 4:57 pm
i think the 33, are the five bishops, plus ither some high ranking priests etc etc.
you can call them "monimous" or "kyvernitikous" of the church
they have a vote , bc of their position in the cypriot church.
so the vote of the people is only partly significant.
you can call them "monimous" or "kyvernitikous" of the church
they have a vote , bc of their position in the cypriot church.
so the vote of the people is only partly significant.
- cypezokyli
- Regular Contributor
- Posts: 2563
- Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 6:11 pm
- Location: deutschland
26 posts
• Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Return to Politics and Elections
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
© 2002 - 2015 Cyprus-Forum.com
