ALL documentary evidence to support claims made by Muslimeen Leader Yasin Abu Bakr against the Patrick Manning regime were destroyed and he now has to depend on his personal knowledge.

Bakr, in High Court Action (HCA) 2292 of 1994, alleged that Indrani Maharaj informed him that virtually everything was destroyed in his office when the police entered his Mucurapo Road compound and used a backhoe to demolish his office.

The matter was filed last June 8 at the Port-of-Spain Supreme Court.

Bakr, in the affidavit, said he placed the documents in his office for the purpose of having them delivered to his attorney-at-law for preparation of the affidavit -- in HCA 2292 of 1994 -- and others.

Bakr shocked the nation last week when startling revelations were released in the affidavit.

In the affidavit, Bakr spilled the beans on his involvement in the marginal seats at the last General Election.

Bakr alleged that he held several meetings with Manning and Culture Minister Joan Yuille-Williams at the Balisier House headquarters of the People’s National Movement (PNM) in the run-up to the 2002 General Election.

The now incarcerated leader claims that he devised strategies together with other members of the Jamaat al Muslimeen to get the PNM to win in the marginal seats and to mobilise young voters of African descent of the “ghetto” areas.

Bakr alleges that Manning told him in a meeting, “the young people listen to you, and I, as prime minister want your help.”

But the Jamaat leader said in the affidavit that the Jamaat members met and decided to see “what Manning was willing to offer in return for our assistance”.

Bakr alleged that he prepared a list after a meeting with senior members of the Jamaat.

The list follows:

With regards to the Jamaat:

1. The remaining lands at Mucurapo would be transferred to the Jamaat.

2. The inclusion of the Mucurapo Islamic College in the Concordat with the Ministry of Education to allow for funding from the government.

3. The State would not enforce the judgement for damages against the Jamaat members listed as defendants in the action herein and that the Jamaat would receive the compensation as ordered by Justice Best in HCA 3982 of 1990.

4. The State would treat the Jamaat fairly as any other community organisation.

With regards to government policy:

1. An effective removal of Value Added Tax (VAT) for the poor people of the nation.

2. An indexation to the price of oil of pension for old persons to allow them to cope with inflation.

3. An increase in the minimum wage to ten dollars an hour.

Bakr alleges that Manning told him the government policies highlighted would be addressed after the election.

“Specifically, the Prime Minister informed me that the remaining portion of the lands at Mucurapo would be given to the Jamaat before the election, that the school would be included within the Concordat.

“With regards to the judgement for damages owed by the Jamaat, the prime minister said he regarded the judgement as a ‘paper judgement’ that would never be enforced and he referred to it as ‘dead issue’ for the government.

“He stated very clearly that his government had no intention to enforce the judgement and that there would be no attempt to enforce the award of damages,” Bakr alleged in the writ.

In relations to the damages owed to the Jamaat, Bakr alleges that the prime minister told him the damages would be paid but the Jamaat would have to wait since the then Attorney General, Glenda Morean had raised objection to authorising the payment.

“The prime minister told me that while this might prevent an immediate payment I should not worry and that he would find a way to by-pass Morean and fix the problem,” Bakr alleged.

Sometime after, Bakr alleged that his attorney-at-law, King, informed him that he had received word from the Attorney General’s office that a cheque was ready for collection.

Bakr further alleged, “I met with King and he showed me a cheque for $700,000 made payable to him.

“King and I went to the bank and a draft was made payable to the Jamaat.

“All cheques that the Jamaat received under the order of Justice Best and the previous order of Justice Anthony Lucky (for the seizing of vehicles owned by the Jamaat after the 1990 insurrection) were made payable to the attorneys on record.”

Following the election, Bakr alleged in the affidavit that he did not hear anything from Manning or the persons he communicated with.

Sometime after, Bakr alleged that he was informed that Manning wanted to see him.

He claims that he went to Balisier House where he was greeted by Manning.

Bakr alleges that the meeting with Manning was short and formal.

“He thanked me and the Jamaat for help during the election and told me I would no longer be meeting with him personally but that Yuille-Williams and Sterling Belgrove would be his liaison and would see that the outstanding matters of our agreement were dealt with,” the Jamaat leader alleged.

Bakr claims that he heard nothing about the school and the Concordat after the election.

He said he went to Education Minister Hazel Manning and Yuille-Williams when things were taking too long to happen.

Bakr claims that he also sent two representatives of the school board, Aneisa Abu Bakr and Indrani Maharaj, to meet with Minister Lenny Saith.

Bakr alleged that in 2005 he received a cheque for the sum of $960,000 from a man called Daniel Lambert.

He said Belgrove asked him to make the cheque out for the Jamaat.

Bakr alleged that the Jamaat received three cheques from Lambert.

He said the cheques were applied to the college and the funds lasted for the September to January term.

He said the cheques stopped and he heard nothing further.

Bakr said there has since been little or no contact with the Jamaat and the government.