Dear Editor,
Mr Hydar Ally in a letter in the SN captioned ‘A misrepresentation of the facts,’ published on October 6, stated that Lionel Peters was bent on “misrepresenting the facts regarding the selection of presidential candidates… since he was not a member of the leadership… and as such was not privy to what transpired.”
First, why “bent on”? Lionel might have misrepresented because of not being there and receiving incorrect information, but I am sure that I would not want to ascribe to him, a stalwart in the struggle and a person of integrity, deliberate acts to misrepresent. In any event it was clearly stated that there were three meetings of the executive at which this matter was discussed before it was taken to the Central Committee (CC), which at one meeting rubber-stamped the decision.
Mr Ally was not a member of the executive when the discussions that really mattered took place. He is therefore not in a position to determine any possible misrepresentation, as his information would also be hearsay. If there were not conflicting positions expressed by the General Secretary, Mr Ralph Ramkarran and Moses Nagamootoo, all of whom were present, and if there was transparency, we would not be having this particular discussion.
In a subsequent letter in SN captioned, ‘Election of PPP party leaders is done in keeping with the norms of democracy,’ published on October 10, in response to a letter written by Rakesh Rampertab, Mr Hydar Ally stated that he would refrain from commenting on Mr Rampertab’s assertions regarding “betrayal afoot at Freedom House.” Why not? He went on to say in the said letter, “…except to state that as insofar as decision-making and the election of party leaders are concerned in the PPP, it is done in keeping with the norms of party democracy emanating from decisions taken at party congresses which are the highest decision-making forum of the party in which all eligible members participate.”
He should now explain why the democratic process at the highest forum of the PPP – its Congress – which gave Moses Nagamootoo the second highest vote by the membership was thwarted by the Central Committee when they left him out of the executive. He should also explain why Congress decided to have a 20 per cent CIVIC component and after this the component went to over fifty per cent. Could these be considered betrayals of the membership’s decisions at the congresses of the party?
In any event, Mr Ally seems confident in the present status quo which in so many instances betrayed the Congress, and indeed the spirit if not the procedure of the democratic process. We have leading members and potential presidential candidates Moses and Ralph examining ways to deepen the democratic processes and facilitating more direct involvement of the membership. Mr Ralph Ramkarran’s publicly stated position is, “While the PPP has not yet reached the stage of open campaigns for leadership positions and presidential candidates, as advocated by Moses, I am sure it will get there soon. Such a method of choosing will do no harm to the party and will strengthen its internal democracy.”
Moses Nagamootoo is on record as saying that the selection of the candidate should involve all the party’s membership, noting that the current procedure is outdated. Would Mr Ally want to join with them to advance the democratic processes?
Mr Ally is the education secretary of the PPP. He may want to recognize and acknowledge my information base with regard to ideology. He would recall at ideological education sessions organized by Lionel Peters in the various regions that I was one of the lecturers. He would know that the party Congress affirmed its support for Marxism-Leninism. He should know that Marx stated that one has to examine the present and the historical data and adjust structures, tactics and strategies in keeping with real and current data.
Today we are no longer illegal or threatened with illegality, therefore in keeping with Marxist praxis should we not adjust policies, strategies and procedures to suit the present situation? Mr Ally should know more than many others that one of the reasons for the collapse of the USSR was its failure to gradually democratize, and so while the USSR moved from a backward feudal country to a superpower and in the process produced one of the best education systems, it moved too slowly towards increasing the involvement of a greater segment of its people in the decision-making processes.
If left to fossilized people, the PPP would suffer the same fate, as the membership has begun to feel alienated from the present leadership, some of whom were imposed through the manipulation of the internal dynamics of the party. In addition, Mr Ally should realize that the policies of the present government are pure and undiluted neoliberalism. Is this not a betrayal of Congress decisions? Did the party Congress ever envisage a government of the PPP carrying out policies that would be to the detriment of the working class; that would facilitate the rich getting vulgarly richer and the poor getting poorer and poorer? Is the widening gap between the rich and the poor not a betrayal?
Was there any discussion on these issues at Congresses? No. In any event the three-day Congress has been reduced to two. Does Mr Ally not think that this would have had serious effects on the democratic processes and the depth of discussions as there is simply no time to adequately discuss the issues?
One last point: members vote at Congress. They express their position with regard to who should be in the CC of the party. Freedom House defies their voice when filling vacancies. Logically, in keeping with the fact that Congress is the highest forum the CC should as much as possible move to the person with the next highest vote to fill vacancies. This is not done.
If Lionel could recall, maybe he can state what happened before he became a candidate member of the CC and what happened when he did. At the CC of the previous Congress it decided to move away from so-called geographical representation and elect someone from the candidate members to fill a vacancy, and so allowed Bheri Ramsaran to become a full member. At the time I was a candidate member. The next Congress when Lionel was the only possible choice, given the level of the candidate members, the CC went back to the so called geographical representation.
And Lionel was definitely one of the persons betrayed by Freedom House. Mr Ally one of the lucky ones. I am sure that he would recall his position that definitely I was given a raw deal. Fazel Khan, the GAC General Manager, felt the full force of the vindictiveness. A vindictiveness that did not care that the national airline GAC would collapse; the same with Moses and some others who are critical and outspoken.
Yours faithfully,
Rajendra Bissessar
