Dear Editor,
Ever since declaring his interest in being the PPP’s presidential candidate for the constitutionally due general elections in 2011 Mr Ralph Ramkarran has written several letters extolling the democratic virtues of the PPP. I now write this letter to show two examples of Mr Ramkarran and the PPP’s practice of democratic centralism rather than democracy. These are my personal experiences with Mr Ramkarran. In early 1993 the PPP held its Region 4 membership conference at Annandale Secondary School. I rose to speak at a time when Mr Ramkarran was chairing the session. He refused to let me express my views. This caused much displeasure amongst the attendees and some members loudly protested. Mr Ramkarran then announced that he would let me be the last speaker. This calmed down the comrades. However towards the end Mr Ramkarran did not let me speak citing lack of time and he hurriedly closed the session. Mr Ramkarran did not allow me to speak because I held opposing views to that of the PPP’s leadership, including Cheddi and Janet Jagan. I had months earlier raised my concerns with Dr Jagan. I even wrote him about the incompetence of the Police Force and its Commissioner and proposed that Paul Slowe replace Laurie Lewis and that British Police be brought to rebuild a new Police Force. After the rise of armed criminals (as I had predicted) I sought to take my case to the PPP membership. However Mr Ramkarran denied my right to express my opinions to the PPP membership. The entire PPP hierarchy was present including the Jagans but no one stopped Mr Ramkarran in his undemocratic act. In my second encounter with him, not being able to express my views in the PPP I resorted to writing letters to the press criticizing the performance of the Minister of Home Affairs and the Commissioner of Police. Mrs Jagan was livid and she convened a two-man committee to discipline me. She selected Messrs Komal Chand and Ralph Ramkarran. I faced this committee at Freedom House in mid 1993. Mr Ramkarran was the point man.
The charge was that I had violated the party’s constitution by publicly criticizing the party in the press. Mr Ramkarran itemized a few of my letters to the Stabroek News and harshly rebuked me. Mr Chand mildly chided me. In my defence I pointed out that I had criticized the Police Commissioner and the Minister of Home Affairs and not the PPP. Mr Komal Chand did not reply to my defence. However Mr Ramkarran argued that the Government and the party were the same and that if I criticized the Government I was also criticizing the party. He went so far as to threaten me with expulsion from the PPP. Mr Chand interjected that I was an old comrade and he calmed things down. I am now amused to see Mr Ramkarran singing about the democratic nature of the PPP and how the party always conducted secret ballots. Mr Ramkarran was a fervent practitioner of democratic centralism and now his presidential ambitions will die by democratic centralism.
Yours faithfully,
Malcolm Harripaul
