Emily Walker
The ongoing dispute between Charles Hoskinson, the founder of Cardano, and the Cardano Foundation has intensified in recent days. This tension surfaced publicly last week when a whistleblower accused the Foundation of prioritizing its interests over proper management.
Among the allegations raised by Hoskinson, a significant one involved a hasty intervention regarding the Cardano constitution. He corroborated the whistleblower’s assertion that the Cardano Foundation nearly disrupted the constitutional process.
Renewed Tensions Between Hoskinson and the Cardano Foundation
The situation escalated again following an announcement from the Cardano Foundation, led by CEO Frederik Gregaard and CTO Giorgio Zinetti, regarding public forums on X on December 17. The Foundation expressed its intent to promote “transparency, clarity, and dialogue” within its operations.
These forums are designed to “address questions and provide context for future collaboration,” with Foundation leaders set to respond to community concerns about financial and governance matters.
In reaction, Hoskinson raised doubts about the genuine intent and effectiveness of these discussions, suggesting that if the Swiss jurisdiction restricts democratic elections for board members, the Foundation should consider relocating.
“If Switzerland doesn’t allow democratic elections for the board, why not move to a jurisdiction that does? The assets could be assigned to another entity. Ask about what happened to Tam, Nico, and Manmeet, and the ESA administrator,” he remarked on X.
Some community members, like Cardano ambassador YUTA-Cardano, disagreed with Hoskinson’s viewpoint. While acknowledging possible flaws, YUTA-Cardano defended the accountability provided by Swiss laws and monitoring bodies, pointing out the practical challenges of Hoskinson’s idea for a member-led organization, such as ensuring fair elections and dealing with potential Sybil attack protections. “It ultimately comes down to trust,” he commented.
Hoskinson maintained that the Foundation’s location in Switzerland is not ideal, emphasizing that his primary concern is about sustainable oversight from the community. He argued that the current leadership, selected under Swiss laws, lacks a representative election process involving the ADA community.
“The Foundation shouldn’t be in Switzerland. There are various jurisdictions, like Abu Dhabi or Wyoming, that could support a different structure. The community could collaborate with the CF to establish this new model. Otherwise, we risk having leaders appointed by the Swiss government indefinitely, with no community influence over fund management or governance,” he asserted.
In response to a different community member who disputed Hoskinson’s claims about governmental appointments, he inquired, “So, who appointed the current council?” without elaborating on the selection process or the Swiss authorities’ involvement.
When pressed for a constructive way forward, Hoskinson argued that certain conflicts are necessary. He emphasized the magnitude of the issue—referring to hundreds of millions of dollars at stake—and the need for openness: “The CF has positively stated these funds will remain under a council not chosen by the community.”
He wrapped up by stating, “This was never my plan as Cardano’s founder, and we’ve reached a critical point. It’s vital for the community to understand this situation with clarity. I’ve spent three years trying to resolve this privately with the CF, but their actions during the constitutional convention and voting in Catalyst were unacceptable. A public confrontation is the only way to drive change.”
At the time of reporting, ADA was priced at $1.0324.