PPP Leadership behaves similar to Ramjattan

Sep 07, 2021 Letters

Dear Editor,

Reference is made to Freddie’s “Ramjattan: The fault … is Indian competitors” (Sep. 2) wherein he excoriated Khemraj for seeing “every high-profile Indian in the AFC as a competitor for leadership and took action to weaken their role and influence”. Isn’t the same also true of an Indian leader of the PPP where “the politics of stench and destruction” has also been playing out long before the AFC was born, consuming good people? So many have become victims in the PPP through undemocratic, selfish leadership post-Jagan, because the leader has lived in morbid fear of others who he sees as a threat. If one is critical of and/or not supportive of the leader, then he is a threat to be eliminated. It is either his way or the highway. The potential threats were shown the door. Rising or ambitious Indians were/are guillotined.
Ramjattan, himself, was expelled from the PPP for allegedly taking party information to the US Ambassador although it was never proven; ironically, the PPP has been very tight with the US Embassy over the last couple years, securing the March 2020 electoral victory. Other AFC big wigs like Moses Nagamootoo, Rajendra Bissessar, Gerhard Ramsaroop, Sasenarine Singh, among others, and ANUG Presidential candidate, Ralph Ramkarran, were all alienated/excommunicated from the PPP by Jagdeo because of the threat they posed to his leadership and dominance of the party. The leader’s behaviour is ‘Putinesque’ (removal of all potential internal opponents and surrounded by sycophants or loyalists and handpicked comrades to support his position and candidates. Any sign of criticising the leader is dealt with swiftly. Could it be that Ramjattan learned from the PPP’s leadership style post-Jagan? Ramjattan has been in the leadership of the AFC since it was birthed in 2005.
Political leaders in our country are authoritarian, because they fear rejection by the voters of their leadership or their selection (nominee) for an office. Like the AFC and PNC, when it comes to nominating a presidential candidate or selecting a leader, it turns out Ramjattan does not behave any differently from the leader of the PPP. Freddie reminds us of how the process was manipulated in the selection of AFC leaders and presidential candidate and the inner conflict with the party. The same characterises the PPP and PNC.
The three parties are not democratic. They involve ordinary voters in an indirect way in their affairs, manipulating the system to validate their preferences. They have used an undemocratic delegate process for choosing their executive, and leader; the delegate process is stacked with the de facto leader’s loyalists. And then the central body manipulates the process for selection of the presidential nominee. The leader decides on MPs, ministers, and other elected officeholders. As the AFC did in its congress, in the PPP, delegates were also stacked in the last two-party congresses for a certain result and the process will be the same in the coming one to exclude the senior members of the party.
Selection of delegates was manipulated as was the choice for members of the Central Committee and Ex Co and ultimately the selection of the party’s nominee for President. This was played out in the 2019 selection of the nominee which saw a more qualified candidate being rejected. Central Committee members were threatened of loss of perks and positions if they didn’t vote for the GS favoured candidate. What takes place in the AFC also occurs in the PPP. Ramjattan behaves hardly differently from the leadership of the PPP. And if one were to examine the PNC, the same would be found to be true where potential leaders who pose a threat to the incumbent would be marginalised and excommunicated.

Yours truly,
Budhram Singh

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News