Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begins

[Paolo Casaschi]

We still don't know and probably never will, whether the Andrew Paulson ECF role was an attempt to subvert the ECF's likely continued opposition to the Kirsan presidency.

It's true that we shall never know with 100% certainty.

However, there is very little doubt in my mind that that was the objective both of Paulson himself and of those who put him up to standing for ECF President.

Possibly. But the other way round could also be true: those that pushed Paulson away acted only after he openly tried to discuss about the ECF vote in Tromso, questioning the support to Kasparov. After all, the AGON ownership of KI became a major issue only in early 2014, while a few of Paulsen's opponents claim being aware of that already before the ECF elections in October.

[Roger de Coverly]

But the other way round could also be true: those that pushed Paulson away acted only after he openly tried to discuss about the ECF vote in Tromso, questioning the support to Kasparov.

It was repeatedly raised as an issue before the ECF election as to whether Paulson supported the established ECF policy of being opposed to a continued Kirsan Presidency. Perhaps his best tactic would have been to remove himself from the debate as by virtue of being a commercial partner of FIDE, Agon would have to work with whoever the FIDE voters elected. I thought we just got evasive answers instead.

There was an outright denial that he had any shared financial interests with Kirsan. That may have been true at the time, what wasn't revealed was that a co-ownership deal for Agon had got to a relatively advanced stage earlier that year. Those who voted for him in the ECF Council, but opposed him being ECF Delegate to ECU will know why they switched, but presumably the January leaks didn't help his case.

[Paolo Casaschi]

There was an outright denial that he had any shared financial interests with Kirsan.

This is where I'm lost. A few people supported (or did not oppose) Paulson despite being aware (by their own admission) of the AGON ownership issue: for a notable example, read few of the last CHESS editorials of M Pein. That became a deal breaker only later.

[Roger de Coverly]

read few of the last CHESS editorials of M Pein.

There was this thread

http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php ... hilit=pein in which

My caveat is this: Nigel Short points to Andrew's business relationship with Kirsan Ilyumzhinov. I've no proof of this, but it seems likely to be the case. I'm passionately in favour of the ECF maintaining its anti-Kirsan stance for the reasons anyone with an ounce of common sense would understand.

If Andrew can assure us, and then demonstrate that Nigel, as FIDE delegate, will have complete freedom of action in this regard, and that he will devote himself to the advancement of chess in England, then that will be fine. I also applaud his idea that we should improve our relationship with FIDE; however that must not be code for improving our relationship with Ilyumzhinov. So I have some reservations, but I believe these can be addressed. The chance to have a person of Andrew's calibre leading the ECF is too good to be missed, so I will be voting for him.

So I suppose what changes to January 2014 is that evidence of sorts of a business relationship emerges. What also changed and appears to have been the cause of internal rows is that Nigel as FIDE Delegate was not given freedom of action, particularly as regards the candidates for the ECU elections.

[JustinHorton]

It's also the case that some people who advocated Paulson's removal claimed it was nothing to do with his relationship to Kirsan or FIDE. I didn't believe this at the time and I don't really think anybody who denied it then is entitled to change their view now. You can't have it both ways.

I'm afraid this election is about Kasparov as much as it is about Kirsan. Again, people can't have it both ways. Either we have ECF statements saying how great the Kasparov ticket is, or Kasparov is irrelevant to the election, but not both. (Incidentally, if the FIDE statutes demand political neutrality, as the statement says - where do they say that, out of interest? - then I'm really not seeing how Kasparov is going to fit himself into that particular mould.)

It would be perfectly in order to issue a statement saying "look, Kirsan must go, we'd rather have any of his aliens than him in the job, it doesn't matter who the other candidate is, just close your eyes and vote against Kirsan". Nothing could be more reasonable. But if you want to back an actual candidate with an actual team and make statements about their individual and collective excellence, then I'm afraid those statements are open to objection. That's not difficult. Matter of fact it's elementary.

[Jonathan Bryant]

There are very many federations who would support a sensible candidate instead of Kirsan, and are only waiting for one to appear.

I’m prepared to believe that if I were ever to meet Garry K, I might come away from the encounter believing him to be a bit of a dick. Where I’m struggling is the proposal that he - or virtually anybody else on the planet (alive or dead) - might be less sensible a candidate than Kirsan.

[Paolo Casaschi]

So I suppose what changes to January 2014 is that evidence of sorts of a business relationship emerges.

At the same time, in a CHESS editorial after January (I don't remember which one) I remember reading M Pein claiming he was told (by AP? Again, I can't remember the full details) that KI was a shareholder of AGON before the ECF election in October. So, the business relationship between AP and KI as exposed by the leaked contract, although not public information yet, was already known to him.

[Roger de Coverly]

So, the business relationship between AP and KI as exposed by the leaked contract, although not public information yet, was already known to him.

There had evidently been something of a falling out between AP and Malcolm. From a statement quoted in the March 2014 Chess, AP wrote

Kasparov put direct and relentless pressure on both of them (Nigel and Malcolm) as his agents in the UK to get rid of me.

[Paul McKeown]

Where I’m struggling is the proposal that he - or virtually anybody else on the planet (alive or dead) - might be less sensible a candidate than Kirsan.

Of any species. Animal or vegetable. Mineral.

Immaterial, really. Unless one's income is supplemented, of course.

[Roger de Coverly]

Of any species. Animal or vegetable. Mineral.

In the parallel thread on a Canadian site, the CFC President (Canadian federation) speculates that a coup was needed to get the ECF to support Kasparov.
http://www.chesstalk.info/forum/showthr ... ions/page4

I would have thought he was wrong, counter-revolution perhaps, with FIDE's attempt to subvert the long standing ECF and British chess community hostility to a lifetime Kirsan Presidency being seen off.

[Chris Rice]

The stakes continue to be raised with a powerful open letter from the Continential Presidents Lekan Adeyemi (Africa), Silvio Danailov (Europe) and Prospero Pichay (Asia) which is given below. It cites abuse of power by FIDE and kicks off with the Agon-Ilyumzhinov complaint to the Ethics Commission. You can retrieve the original complaint and supporting evidence from the Kasparov campaign site here

http://kasparov2014.com/2014/06/18/open ... andidates/

It appears the matters was referred by Prospero Pichay the Asian President and Githinji Hinga from the Kenyan Chess Federation.

The open letter also mentions another allegation of electoral fraud not referred to earlier by Nigel Short as far as I can see regarding the Vietnam vote and this one appears to have undisputable evidence from a letter signed by Kirsan Ilyumzhinov himself. Again that can be accessed from the link above.

June 18, 2014 00:38

Open Letter from Continental Candidates

To the chess community:

As Continental leadership candidates for Africa, Asia, and Europe who desire positive change in FIDE after so long, we feel obliged to speak out about abuses of power and conflicts of interest by the current FIDE administration. 19 years in control of FIDE by one group has led to them treating FIDE as their personal property.

First is the scandalous secret contract between the company Agon and Mr. Ilyumzhinov. The agreement gave the FIDE president 51% of the voting shares and control of the new company. Other FIDE executives and employees – Berik Balgabaev, Georgios Makropoulos – also receive shares and cash payments as part of the deal as “consultants to Agon.” This secret contract was signed by the FIDE president when at the same time FIDE had a public agreement with Agon for the rights to FIDE events, including the World Championship.

To be clear: with the powers of his office, the FIDE president sold rights worth millions of dollars to himself and a partner, while promising generous payments to his executive team.

The complaint to the FIDE Ethics Commission regarding the Agon scandal submitted by Githinji Hinga of Kenya and Prospero Pichay of Philippines is attached herewith.

FIDE authority and resources have also been abused during Mr. Ilyumzhinov’s reelection campaign. We publish here a letter he personally wrote to a high government official in Vietnam in an attempt to interfere with the ongoing election. The letter, here attached, protests the choice of the Vietnamese delegate and does so on FIDE letterhead, and he writes as the president of FIDE, an evident abuse of his office.

After 19 years, this FIDE management group has forgotten that they represent the organization, not the other way around. It is time to end this type of abuse and to bring change to FIDE with new people who will respect the federations and their independence. We do not have to rely on the Ethics Commission to do this. Colleagues, we federation leaders have that power with our vote and on August 11 in Tromsø we must use it.

Lekan Adeyemi
President, Nigeria Chess Federation and Candidate for African Continental Presidency

Silvio Danailov
President, Bulgarian Chess Federation and President, European Chess Union, standing for reelection

Prospero Pichay
President, National Chess Federation of the Philippines and Candidate for Asian Continental Presidency

[JustinHorton]

FIDE's attempt to subvert the long standing ECF and British chess community hostility to a lifetime Kirsan Presidency

Thing is though Roger, for as long as I can remember English chess has been notable for two characteristics:

(a) relentless hostility to FIDE leadership on the grounds of secrecy, ethical violations, disregard for proper procedures and so on;

(b) resort to secrecy, tolerance of ethical violations and disregard for proper procedures where its own affairs are concerned.

I mean I've never known English chess either to miss an opportunity to criticise FIDE, or to take an opportunity to do the right thing itself when it was able to do otherwise.

[David Sedgwick]

The stakes continue to be raised with a powerful open letter from the Continential Presidents Lekan Adeyemi (Africa), Silvio Danailov (Europe) and Prospero Pichay (Asia) ...

Purely for information, only one of the three (Danailov) is an incumbent President. The other two are candidates in their respective Continents.

[David Sedgwick]

In the parallel thread on a Canadian site, the CFC President (Canadian federation) speculates that a coup was needed to get the ECF to support Kasparov.
http://www.chesstalk.info/forum/showthr ... ions/page4

I would have thought he was wrong, counter-revolution perhaps, with FIDE's attempt to subvert the long standing ECF and British chess community hostility to a lifetime Kirsan Presidency being seen off.

The CFC President is clearly in serious trouble for defying the wishes of a large number of CFC members. In desperation, he is resorting to misrepresentation of events here in England.

[Roger de Coverly]

Thing is though Roger, for as long as I can remember English chess has been notable for two characteristics:

(a) relentless hostility to FIDE leadership on the grounds of secrecy, ethical violations, disregard for proper procedures and so on;

Well I think you are a bit younger than me, but can I remind you that Campomanes became FIDE President in 1982 by exploiting the votes of new Federations. In 1986, free travel was available to the Olympiad in Dubai, but only if you agreed to vote the "right" way. The expansion of FIDE from the 1970s onwards was all very well, but it needed to be accompanied by voting reforms as one Federation, one vote leads to a system with the characteristics of 1830s Britain. So the views and preferences of individuals in small organisations have far more weight in voting effect than those in large ones.