Ponta was already unpopular for being accused of some other charge of fraud or plagiarism. He denied it and refused to resign. Does the fact that he's resigning now basically amount to an admission of guilt?
Also, how is Ponta supposed to have had such a close relationship to this particular club? I mean, it's clearly a tragedy, but IIRC nobody was calling for heads to roll in Rhode Island after a very similar fire there in 2003 or the nightclub fire in Brazil in 2013.
You are far from ignorant of the situation, but IMO while each of the 3 clauses in your first sentences is individually true, the sentence as a whole isn't. Let's see:
- "Ponta was already unpopular" - absolutely true, especially in Bucharest where the tragedy took place and where the protests were most powerful.
- "for being accused of some other charge of fraud or plagiarism" - for starters, he has not just been accused, he has been officially indicted for seventeen separate offences including money laundering, forgery, embezzlement and tax evasion. The only thing that had been keeping him from being arrested until now is his immunity. He
has committed fraud and plagiarism and refused to resign, but that by itself is not the reason for his unpopularity. Having a brass neck/chutzpah in Balkan politics is absolutely essential for survival.
- "He denied it and refused to resign" - well, he denied it, yes, and he refused to resign as Prime Minister. Crucially, however, when the indictment came in July, he was pushed into resigning as leader of the Social Democratic Party of Romania (PSD) and was succeeded by the altogether excellent
Liviu Dragnea. I guess the PSD has a rule against having leaders who are under trial, but not one against people who have actually been convicted, because Mr. Dragnea had just been sentenced for vote rigging in the 2012 referendum...
Ever since losing the presidential election, Ponta has been something of a lame duck, but now Dragnea has essentially made his position untenable, publicly casting doubt on his abilities and constantly overruling him, with the PSD parliamentary faction rejecting Ponta's nominees and lifting the immunity for some of his cronies.
It probably must be said that the PSD is not really a party in the conventional sense - it has been described as a confederation of local county machines, each controlled by the respective 'baron'. The party leader is leader so long as he can offer the barons a chance of winning elections and the fruits of office. Under Ponta they were doomed. Under Dragnea... well, they are still doomed, but they stand more of a chance of rebounding in the next cycle - the regional history is full of successful comebacks after a resignation.
And so Ponta was made to fall on his sword. I hasten to add that this probably appears overly cynical - the hundreds of thousands on Romanian streets have made a difference and will almost certainly bring about more sweeping changes than just the changing of the guard. The Romanian political system is undergoing a major transformation, with the Anti-Corruption Authority (DNA) performing a much better job than expected (and certainly far better than what the politicians who created it conceived). All politicians from all parties no longer feel themselves omnipotent and above the law and this was a major victory.
It will be interesting to see if Iohannis will - as every Romanian president in a cohabitation up to now - attempt to get a government friendly to himself through parliament, despite the votes not being there. I very much doubt that the unsavory tactics required to do that are what the people in the streets want, but I also doubt that they want a continued PSD government. I must admit I have no idea what happens now - my impressions are that a lot of people see the PSD and the PNL as the two sides of the same problem, but then they still vote for one of them. And while almost everyone approves of the work the DNA has done, there is a whiff of the Securitate (Ceasusescu's secret police/security apparatus) about it.
