English Chess Forum

It says here

Source

EDIT: posted wrong link, Lawrence has it below

Peter Doggers sheds some more light on the matter. Seems like it was a misunderstanding, that Ilyumzhinov hadn't really meant to resign but the words he used were good enough for FIDE to assume that he had announced his resignation. Don't think this story is finished yet. https://www.chess.com/news/view/breakin ... enies-2975

We will see

Interesting to see what else happened in the meeting decisions

To pay the prize money for the Tehran WWCC from FIDE money

To give a two-week deadline for the Iranian Chess Federation to send the money they owe to FIDE failing which the services for them will be frozen

Mick Norris wrote:We will see

Interesting to see what else happened in the meeting decisions

To pay the prize money for the Tehran WWCC from FIDE money

To give a two-week deadline for the Iranian Chess Federation to send the money they owe to FIDE failing which the services for them will be frozen

"FIDE money"? Presume this comes from mugging the Federations.

Chess24 have now weighed in on resignation gate and the FIDE leader is clearly seeing a conspiracy by the American chess federation as the source of his problems. https://chess24.com/en/read/news/ilyumz ... or-does-he

Saying "I resign" during a meeting doesn't always mean much (we have an MCF Council meeting tonight, and the current and previous President both failed with that and had to give 12 months notice to get people to take us seriously )

The main thing we are learning is not to bet with Nick on FIDE politics

Chess24 twitter feed (translation):

Ilyumzhinov says his resignation was discussed "behind the scenes", but it wasn't on the official agenda:

In a telephone conversation with Kirill Zangalis, Kirill Zangalis, Kirsan Ilyumzhinov explained the situation around his alleged resignation from the post of FIDE President.

"The question of my resignation was not officially discussed at the FIDE Presidential Council," commented Kirsan Ilyumzhinov. - It all started from the moment when the US included me in the sanctions list. After that my ill-wishers had a desire to remove me from the post of FIDE President. In particular, at the Presidential Council held in Athens, this came from the American Chess Federation. But, I would like to stress once again that officially there was no such agenda, and conversations were conducted only on the sidelines. Apparently, people who wanted to displace me, gave my wish for reality. I continue to work in the usual rhythm."

https://twitter.com/chess24com/status/8 ... 2152791041

The plot thickens: http://www.fide.com/component/content/a ... enies.html

It's interesting that Nigel Freeman is not only sticking to the points he made yesterday, but even adding a further comment that reflects badly on Kirsan.

For that letter to be on the FIDE website must confirm that the Presidential Board would be quite happy for him to resign.

They are certainly going for it

I see that on the list of active topics, "Kirsan Ilyumzhinov announced his resignation as FIDE President" is followed immediately by "Why did he do so?".

It won't be after this post, of course.

If Kirsan has lost the confidence of the Presidential Board (Council? Is there a difference?), can they force him out? Or is it only the General Assembly that has the power to do that?

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:If Kirsan has lost the confidence of the Presidential Board (Council? Is there a difference?), can they force him out? Or is it only the General Assembly that has the power to do that?

So far as I can tell, the Statutes are silent on that. They were drawn up in 2010*, heavily influenced by Kasparov's lawyers at a time when he thought he was going to be President, so perhaps constraints upon that office were not a priority. Anyway, it is now clear that a robust legal opinion is required.

*I think I should have said 2012.

NickFaulks wrote:

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:If Kirsan has lost the confidence of the Presidential Board (Council? Is there a difference?), can they force him out? Or is it only the General Assembly that has the power to do that?

So far as I can tell, the Statutes are silent on that. They were drawn up in 2010, heavily influenced by Kasparov's lawyers at a time when he thought he was going to be President, so perhaps constraints upon that office were not a priority. Anyway, it is now clear that a robust legal opinion is required.

Am I right in thinking the statutes are silent on what happens if the President - or anyone else on his ticket, for that matter - resigns? I only looked quickly, but I couldn't find anything authoritative.