The name of Charilaos Mariolis has once again been thrust into a compromising position in the midst of the rebuilding process of Olympic boxing. With World Boxing approaching decisive elections —November 23, 2025, in Rome— the candidacy submitted on his behalf by the Hellenic Boxing Federation (EOP) has come under serious doubt. As reported on Thursday by the Greek newspaper ‘Meres‘, that bid has apparently been directly blocked for legal reasons, opening the door to a very different scenario from the one the Greek official had envisioned.

The Greek publication outlines a much broader context than previously known and initially revealed by SportsIn. It refers to extraordinary audits ordered by the authorities into the EOP’s financial and administrative management over the past four years. A process which, according to ‘Meres’, began several days ago and is reportedly uncovering “multiple findings” related to the management of federation funds since 2021.

The information describes a striking contrast between Mariolis’s initial promises —he arrived at the presidency as a supposed catalyst for renewal, promising sponsorships, greater competitive fairness and the elimination of fees for clubs and athletes— and what former board members, referees, coaches and athletes are now reporting to authorities. The complaints, amounting to hundreds of thousands of euros, point to the misuse of a bank card linked to the Federation. This is an unusual tool for a sports entity and, according to the published information, was used to cover expenses at luxury hotels, restaurants, shops and airline tickets to destinations unrelated to any boxing activity.

Complaints from referees and the Greek national team

Alongside these expenses, several referees claim they were not compensated for their services, and numerous athletes and coaches report having had to pay out of their own pockets for travel, accommodation and meals when competing with the national team. All this despite initial assurances that such situations would never happen again.

The newspaper ‘Meres’ adds another central element: the criminal record for forgery that, according to the Greek sports authorities, made Mariolis ineligible to hold any sporting office. This incompatibility led to his dismissal —ratified by the General Secretariat of Sports— although, according to the same information, the official continued to exert influence within the EOP. Not only is it claimed that he maintained internal influence, but after his dismissal he was appointed chairman of the Technical Committee and later officially proposed as a candidate for the presidency of World Boxing.

This is where the situation takes on an international dimension. The Greek Boxing Coaches Association also issued a statement along the same lines: “Mariolis, disqualified from World Boxing.” According to that statement, the Greek official would not be able to take part in the elections in Rome, where everything points to Kazakh Gennady Golovkin being the sole candidate. If Mariolis considers running, the Association will appeal to the CAS.

The case raises questions about the governance of the Hellenic Federation and, beyond that, highlights the broader uncertainty within Olympic boxing, where World Boxing is trying to project stability at a decisive moment. Will World Boxing gain credibility without Mariolis in Rome? How are the IOC and its president Kirsty Coventry following this issue?

And more. Among the candidates, there are still figures closely tied to the former IBA. The clearest example is Istvan Kovacs, vice-presidential hopeful and former IBA’s secretary general during one of the organization’s most controversial periods. That continuity leads many in international boxing to wonder what has truly changed in World Boxing if the same people remain in key positions.

The situation surrounding Boris van der Vorst’s candidacy has opened an uncomfortable debate within World Boxing. That someone who worked actively to drive the transition away from the IBA, and who was one of the most visible figures advocating for change, has ultimately been left out of the electoral process raises inevitable questions. Who really made the decision to prevent him from running? And for what reason? Several sources share the feeling that if a person so deeply involved in breaking with the past cannot stand for election, the autonomy of World Boxing and the transparency of its operations are called into question. At a time when the organization is trying to project a renewed image, decisions like this fuel doubts about how real the change truly is or whether certain dynamics still depend on interests that remain out of sight.