AAVE Governance Debate intensifies: Stani Kulechov under scrutiny over multi-million dollar token purchases before DAO election

The Aave platform is increasingly coming into focus in a fundamental governance discussion. At the center of the debate is founder Stani Kulechov, whose acquisition of AAVE tokens worth approximately $10 million immediately before a critical DAO vote raises questions about the integrity of decentralized decision-making processes.

Why the token purchases raise concerns

The controversial proposal involves transferring brand assets—including domain names, social media accounts, and intellectual property—to the DAO structure. Critics like DeFi strategist Robert Mullins argue that Stani Kulechov’s purchase of AAVE tokens occurred at a time of high strategic relevance, when voting rights over key decisions were being decided. The concern: the purchase could have served as a means to strengthen voting power in a vote whose outcome directly influences the structure and control of the protocol.

Ernesto Boado, former Chief Technology Officer (CTO) of Aave Labs and author of the controversial proposal, also expressed criticism of the process. He stated that this governance step was transferred to a snapshot vote without his full consent—an development he characterized as a breach of trust.

Concentration of voting power reveals structural challenges

Current on-chain data on Aave governance show a fundamental problem: voting power is highly concentrated. The top 10 addresses control about 46.70% of voting rights, while the top 20 addresses already hold 56.54% of total voting strength. This concentration becomes even more apparent among larger address groups—the top 50 addresses account for 71.79%, and the top 100 even 79.97% of voting power.

Such figures highlight a central paradox: while decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) are supposed to operate on the principle of distributed control, the reality of Aave shows a significant concentration of decision-making authority. This partly contradicts the ideal of decentralization and creates room for scenarios where influential stakeholders—like Stani—can exert disproportionate influence.

Impact on the market and the community

The governance discrepancies have not only led to internal tensions within the Aave community but also affect market dynamics. The AAVE token has experienced increased price movements, partly driven by selling pressure resulting from governance uncertainties. The ongoing snapshot vote remains a critical moment, raising the question of whether community-driven decision-making or concentrated voting power will determine the outcome.

The bigger dilemma: how can decentralized governance be practically implemented when the prerequisite—a broad distribution of voting rights—is systematically violated? The Aave situation illustrates that even established DeFi protocols must grapple with the fundamental challenges of true decentralization.