A high court judge on Friday ordered an affidavit alleging that Prime Minister Patrick Manning offered favours to Jamaat-al-Muslimeen leader Yasin Abu Bakr to be sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for further investigation, saying no one is above then law.Justice Rajendra Narine also ruled that the contentious document be investigated by Acting Commissioner of Police James Philbert.
The judge said, "If the allegations are true, the prime minister made promises of State resources to the leader of an organisation which had made an unsuccessful attempt to overthrow the duly-elected government of the country, in return for the Jamaat's leverage in the marginal constituencies."
He added, "The court is confident that the relevant authorities will carry out their constitutional duties without fear or favour."
Bakr's affidavit was the basis of an appeal to the Privy Council challenging the right of the government of Trinidad and Tobago to seek compensation for properties destroyed by Bakr and his group during the failed 1990 coup against the NAR government.
The Muslimeen leader had asked the Law Lords to reinstate the affidavit he had filed regarding the alleged deal he made with Manning to write off the debt as payment for favours to Manning and the People's National Movement (PNM).
Bakr claimed that there was a clear understanding with Manning that he, Bakr, would mobilise young people to vote for the PNM in marginal constituencies in 2002. Bakr said he held meetings with Manning at which it was agreed that there was a need for Bakr to assist in curbing the increase in crime in certain areas.
Bakr said he presented Manning with a list of what the Jamaat wanted in exchange for assisting the governing party and the government. The demands included assurances that there would be no attempt to enforce payment of the judgment debt.
The Privy Council rejected the affidavit, saying it was irrelevant to the case. But it expressed serious concerns about the alleged deal, which it said was a private one that did not involve the state.
However it said in its opinion the private arrangement between Manning and Bakr was corrupt within the meaning...of Section 3 (of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1987) and "each party to the agreement was acting in contravention of the section.”
Justice Narine said as far as the court is aware, "no action has been taken by the appropriate authorities to conduct a thorough investigation of the allegations".
Read the story: Privy Council rules against Muslimeen, slams deal...
Related: Kamla asks DPP to investigate PM Manning on Muslimeen affidavit
When the issue came up Manning refused to address it saying, "I need legal advice before I comment. I'll have to talk to the attorney general before I make a comment, so I am not in a position to make a comment on the matter."
Read the story: PM has no comment
Justice Narine also ordered that 11 properties belonging to the Bakr and and his second in command, Kala Aki Bua, be auctioned off to compensate for damage incurred during the failed 1990 insurrection.
However, he agreed to a 14-day stay of the auction following an application by the Muslimeen lawyers to file an appeal.
The matter dates back to February 2006 when the State sued Abu Bakr and 114 other current and former Jamaat members, threatening to seize and sell several parcels of land to recover a $32 million debt, which resulted from the destruction of Police Headquarters during the 1990 attempted coup.
The lawsuit, filed by then Attorney General John Jeremie on February 6, 2006, identified 11 properties purportedly owned by Bakr and Bua, to be put up for sale to satisfy part of the debt owed to the State.
The damage was assessed at $15 million, with three per cent interest per annum from July 27, 1990, and 12 per cent for each year the sum remained unpaid following the assessment in January 2001. The debt was estimated at more than $32 million earlier this year and carries a daily interest rate of $6,480.30.
No comments:
Post a Comment