Late evidence sparks courtroom clash in Mohameds’ extradition case

Jan 09, 2026 News

---

(Kaieteur News) – What was expected to be a routine continuation of committal proceedings in the high-profile extradition case involving father and son Nazar and Azruddin Mohamed erupted into courtroom drama on Thursday at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court.

The case, which revolves around charges of fraud, money laundering, and tax evasion, was put on hold after prosecutors submitted additional evidence that had not been previously disclosed to the defence. The defence team, led by attorneys Roysdale Forde SC, Damien Da Silva, and Siand Dhurjon, strongly opposed the new evidence, which they argued could alter the course of their defence.

The Mohamed family faces charges in a U.S. federal court in Miami, Florida. A 25-page indictment, unsealed on October 2, 2025, accuses them of masterminding an extensive fraud scheme that involved gold exports, customs fraud, bribery, and evasion of millions in taxes and royalties owed to Guyana. During Tuesday’s session, the prosecution’s first witness, Sharon Roopchand-Edwards, the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, testified regarding the documents she received from the U.S. as part of the extradition request. However, the defence raised concerns about gaps in her testimony. Notably, Roopchand-Edwards had engaged with the Minister of Home Affairs, who is not her subject minister, and was unable to properly identify a document she claimed was signed by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Hugh Hilton Todd. This prompted the defence to challenge the validity of the evidence presented.

The following day, on Thursday, the court heard from prosecutor Terrence Williams, who revealed that the prosecution had submitted an additional statement from the Minister of Foreign Affairs via email the day before. This disclosure came as a surprise to the defence, who objected on the grounds that they had not been informed in advance and that the submission of new evidence at this stage could affect their ability to adequately prepare their case.

Dhurjon argued that this late disclosure was problematic. “We have a grave difficulty with it,” he stated, emphasising that the prosecution had previously indicated that all evidence had been submitted in earlier hearings. He further argued that this new statement appeared to fill in the gaps left by Roopchand-Edwards’ testimony, claiming that the prosecution was abusing the court process by repeatedly submitting new evidence. “The proper thing to do is to seek the leave of the worship,” Dhurjon said, urging the magistrate to rule against the late submission.

Additionally, the defense requested an adjournment to allow them time to evaluate the new evidence and reorganise their strategy. In response, prosecutor Williams defended the late disclosure, stating it was made out of “abundance of caution” and to ensure that all the required documents were in order for the extradition process. He explained that the new statement supported the Certificate of the Minister, which is required by the Fugitive Offenders (Amendment) Act. Williams downplayed the significance of the new disclosure, insisting it was a formal requirement and that further disclosures could occur if deemed necessary. “If something arises that requires further disclosure, then we would be required to disclose,” he said, adding that such practices were standard in the legal process.

Magistrate Judy Latchman, while ultimately allowing the new statement to be filed, did not hold back in her criticism of the prosecution’s conduct. “This is not a game of chess,” she firmly stated. “There are no knights here, so there is no L-form jumping. You have to serve, you have to file all your statements, and this should have been done beforehand… there will not be any further disclosure.”

The magistrate made it clear that such late disclosures were unacceptable and warned the prosecution that they must adhere to proper procedures in the future. She adjourned the matter to February 5, 2025, emphasising the importance of the new statement to the defence. “One word could be crucial,” she said.

Following the session, Prosecutor Williams while speaking with reporters defended the prosecution’s actions, stating, “We do what we need to do to put forward the case, and then sometimes you have to react to what occurs in court.” He added that it was essential for legal teams to use court resources efficiently. On the other hand, Dhurjon expressed frustration with the repeated submissions of new evidence. “Yesterday, at 2 p.m., they emailed a fresh statement, a statement of none other than the Minister of Foreign Affairs. While we relish the opportunity to cross-examine him, we thought it unfair,” Dhurjon said. He noted that this was the fifth time the prosecution had submitted new statements. “The magistrate believed it was fit to permit that evidence, and she, conversely, saw it fit to give us time to take fresh instructions. Our defence will now have to be reorganised and re-coordinated.”

---

• Azruddin Mohamed, extradition case, Mohameds, Nazar Mohamed, Siand Dhurjon, Terrence Williams SC

---