People who know me would be displeased at my recklessness in broaching any discussion on the Jamaat al Muslimeen and the profound impact that this organisation has had on our society. That in itself speaks volumes about the more-than-residual influence that this bunch has had on the national psyche. The Government has decided to throw caution to the wind, putting a hand into the viper's hole. The Attorney General boldly announced the auctioning of Jamaat properties as part of this administration's opening salvo in an effort at recovery of money already awarded to the State by a court ruling (and I will come back to that). As one would expect, the leader of the Jamaat did not spare any thought for this edict from the courts. He would be right in ignoring the order. Only in Trinidad could members of a such an organisation, which staged a bloody insurrection, not only be freed but go on to assume positions of wealth and prominence in the very same society they threatened with guns.
In this region, I dare say only Suriname is as ridiculous as we are (former military strongman Desi Bourterse won recent elections in that country with a coalition force while facing trial for the execution of 15 opponents in 1980). We are not spared the effrontery of having the Jamaat contest the general election under the New National Vision. The coup leader's progeny would stand before this country and froth contrite, "Do not condemn me for the sins of my father...if you can call them sins." With those final words, this young man defiled the graves and the memories of those killed in 1990. Typically, Abu Bakr is chuffed at the idea of sitting before a commission of enquiry and "spilling the beans" about who didn't know and who knew, Turk 182. This will be his pulpit, an opportunity to address the population en masse with his perceived romantic ideals that inspired this half-baked kurta and rifle putsch. I want to avoid getting into a discussion about that epoch in our underdevelopment as I can only do so with the deployment of language most intemperate; as yet unacceptable in this forum.
It is owed to the very nature of Trinidad society that Abu Bakr's dream of an Islamic island in the sun never came to pass. He scattered those seeds on the soil of apathy. You see it is not that Trinis are peace-loving, it's just that they don't care. So while some were expecting that the imam's appearance on television with gun-toting drones at his flanks would galvanise the society into popular revolt, they failed to realise that this is Gomorrah, not Cuba. The streets devolved into a writhing orgy of theft, destruction and reverie. Twenty years later and the insidious contagion of the Jamaat can be felt and gleefully ignored in every corner of our country. The former insurgents are now businessmen, infiltrating quarrying, the regional corporations, URP, Cepep and God knows where else. Abu Bakr has done very well for himself, having acquired palatial properties that folks will only whisper about. Certainly no one is going to question the bona fides of these acquisitions. Where does the Jamaat get its money from? Ordinarily this would be no one's business except for the fact that this is an organisation which has attempted a bloody coup in this country.
It is doubtful whether these matters will be plumbed in the commission of enquiry. Establishing the terms of reference for the commission will be quite the challenge as there are more dimensions to the 1990 attempted coup than most of us are able to fathom, particularly with the dearth of facts available to the public. Expecting prosecutions on such an exercise should not, perhaps, be the guiding motivation of this enquiry. I, however, hold the view that the objective of closure is highly overrated, particularly in a society like ours where lessons to be learned from such an inquest are cold comfort if you accept (and you should) that we are a difficult student. Many have suggested that it is politically expedient at this time to exhume the crisis which is for the most part buried in the national psyche. The Prime Minister would not have to get her hands dirty in smoothing the soil over the political graves of Panday, Manning and Ramesh. Well, that argument does not hold any water because the aforementioned careers have already gone to the place from whence there is no return, so anything further would just be cruel overkill.
Regardless of your opinion on the efficacy of an enquiry 20 years too late, it is one part of our recognition that the Jamaat must be confronted. As far as the Attorney General's blustering about the disposal of their properties, well as I said I would like to see the braveheart or dumba-- who is going to put a bid on property wrested from the possession of the Jamaat al Muslimeen. I interpreted the AG's statement as nothing more than a political strategy lagniappe: show the people that we mean business! No one is really going to come with a cheque, right? Wrong! A little cobo told me that at least one Port-of-Spain developer dispatched his lawyers to investigate the possibility of a real estate feeding frenzy. From what I was told, the developer was advised by counsel that it is an absolute waste of time.
First off, any acquisition could only be made as a part shareholder. In other words, the purchaser would not have full legal title to the land but would have to submit to some nebulous "shared" arrangement (shared with whom is the real question).
The real kicker, however, is the "as is" clause which I understand is not uncommon in land acquisition deals. This means if you buy the land, you buy it with what, and whoever, is on it! So then, can you imagine someone purchasing a property from which they have to evict Yasin Abu Bakr? This is a matter which, of course, I expect the Attorney General will answer in due course. At the very least it is demonstrative of an administration willing to confront our greatest fear. A commission of enquiry ought not to be so much about who has cocoa in the sun (if you look long and hard enough, you will be forced to admit that this entire country is one giant cocoa house) but whether we as a society are ready to repudiate Abu Bakr and his beliefs which are still very much alive today. This insurgent, when asked on television on numerous occasions whether he would repeat his actions of 1990, has said an unequivocal yes. In most civilised societies he would already have been convicted of sedition for having said it publicly once. Here in Trinidad, I have to sit next to him in the VIP section of the Hasely Crawford Stadium at a football game.