Commissioner of Inland Revenue defends voodoo claims

COMMISSIONER of Inland Revenue and chairman of the board Deomati Ramdass has defended her actions after a senior worker accused the organisation of unfairly transferring her owing to allegations of practicing voodoo.

A four-page pre-action protocol letter dated February 10, and signed by attorney Kiran Panday, representing the worker and addressed to Ramdass, condemned the allegations as "completely untrue."

The claims stemmed from an artefact placed on his client's work desk by a colleague who had returned from New Orleans.

Panday's letter said the object, a cultural item with no religious or supernatural significance, was mistakenly associated with voodoo practices.

In response via a four-page letter dated March 7, Ramdass maintained that it was her "personal belief" that the worker was involved in the practice of voodoo.

She provided a picture of the artefact, saying the word "'VooDoo' is clearly written across its torso."

Ramdass said she enquired about the meaning of the object and the reason for its presence in the office.

To date, no reason was given for its presence in the office. The only explanation given was where it originated.

Ramdass listed its origin, and the word voodoo led her to make the link.

She added: "The uncanny resemblance of the artefact and a voodoo doll from pictures I have seen of the latter on the internet."

"The timing of the appearance of the "artefact" coinciding with her reassignment, which it is now apparent she was not pleased with."

Ramdass also cited the continued absence of a reason for the presence of the "artefact" in the office.

On December 10, 2024, the worker, an acting Stenographer III in Port of Spain, got a letter from HR informing her that she was being reassigned to another unit – BIR's legal unit.

Ramdass submitted that the reassignment resulted from an ordinary management decision based on multiple requests by the legal unit for clerical staff that was set in train before December 10, 2024.

Ramdass said, "Given that the work in the legal unit is demanding and complex, it was therefore necessary to ensure that clerical staff assigned to the unit was well suited to address those needs."

The letter added that the worker's superior work ethic made her an excellent choice for the unit and the decision to reassign her there was made on this basis.

Ramdass insisted that the worker had neither been nor was she the subject of victimisation at the board, and her duties remained the same.

"Having regard to the contents of this letter, I trust that you would let good sense prevail and take no further action in relation to this matter that has now become a public spectacle owing to the widespread publicity this matter gained in the local media," she added.

Ramdass said she hoped the matter can be resolved amicably without recourse to the courts.

Apart from Panday, attorney Surya Deonarine also represents the worker.