Latest update May 4th, 2026 12:35 AM
Latest News
- Foreign gold company pays Guyanese US$5M to earn up to 70% interest in 73,000 acres gold project
- Resource curse has taken root in Guyana – Ram warns
- OPEC+ agrees third oil output quota hike since closure of Strait of Hormuz
- Hamilton Green warns of ‘crumbs’ for citizens, pushes national unity to protect oil wealth
- EPA did not greenlight financial study on impact of oil spill – Exxon consultant
Mohameds appeal Justice Singh’s ruling in extradition matter
(Kaieteur News) – Lawyers representing Opposition Leader, Azruddin Mohamed and his father Nazar have taken one of their legal challenges in the ongoing extradition proceedings to the Court of Appeal, following its dismissal by Acting Chief Magistrate Navindra Singh.
The appeal arises out of High Court proceedings involving a judicial review challenging the Minister of Home Affairs’ Authority to Proceed (ATP) in the extradition case, as well as a constitutional challenge to sections of the Fugitive Offenders (Amendment) Act of 2009.
On February 4, 2026, Justice Singh ruled against the judicial review application, which alleged bias on the part of the Government and, in particular, Minister of Home Affairs Oneidge Walrond. The ruling was delivered via email to both the defence and prosecution, according to Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs Anil Nandlall, SC, in a statement posted on his Facebook page.
Father and Son (left) Nazar and Opposition leader Azruddin Mohamed
Nandlall explained that Justice Singh found no basis for the allegation of bias, ruling that the Minister, in issuing the Authority to Proceed, was not performing a quasi-judicial function but rather executing a statutory and executive duty conferred by Parliament under the Fugitive Offenders Act. As such, the question of bias did not arise. “In that ruling he dismissed the actions or the proceedings filed by the Mohameds in which they are claiming the bias. He ruled that a case for bias has not been made out and cannot be made out that the minister is not performing the type of function when she is issuing that authority, but is simply discharging a simple executive function and a statutory dictate which parliament has invested her with by virtue of the Fugitive Offenders Act and that the questions does not arise,” he explained.
Justice Singh also awarded costs of $500,000 each to the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Attorney General, and Principal Magistrate Judy Latchman. The constitutional challenge to sections of the Fugitive Offenders (Amendment) Act of 2009 is scheduled to be heard on February 16, 2026.
However, in an invited comment on Sunday, lead attorney for the Mohameds, Roysdale Forde, SC, told Kaieteur News that the defence has already filed an appeal against Justice Singh’s ruling to the Court of Appeal. Earlier, on January 15, the Mohameds’ legal team, comprising Forde, SC, Siand Dhurjon, and Damien Da Silva, filed both the constitutional motion challenging the 2009 amendments and the judicial review application alleging bias by the Minister of Home Affairs.
During the High Court proceedings, the defence argued that the extradition process was tainted by political bias, particularly in light of Azruddin Mohamed’s entry into politics in early 2025 and his alleged rivalry with the governing People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C). The defence contended that this political context influenced the Minister’s decision to authorise the extradition and therefore sought to have the Authority to Proceed quashed.
The prosecution, however, maintained that the Minister acted fully in accordance with the law and that no bias influenced the decision to authorise extradition. In advancing submissions, attorney Forde focused on Section 8(3)(b) of the Fugitive Offenders (Amendment) Act 2009. He argued that Guyana’s extradition arrangement with the United States is deficient because it does not explicitly guarantee that an extradited person cannot be re-extradited to a third country without Guyana’s prior consent.
Forde further contended that Section 8(3)(b) prohibits extradition to the United States unless adequate safeguards exist to prevent re-extradition without the approval of the Government of Guyana.
Nazar and Azruddin Mohamed are facing a federal indictment in Miami, Florida, following the unsealing of a 25-page indictment on October 2, 2025. The indictment alleges that the pair orchestrated a wide-ranging fraud and money-laundering scheme involving gold exports, customs fraud, bribery, and the evasion of millions of dollars in taxes and royalties owed to Guyana. Following a formal request from the United States, Minister Walrond signed the Authority to Proceed, allowing the extradition matter to move forward before the Magistrates’ Court. If sufficient evidence is established, the magistrate may order the Mohameds’ extradition to face charges in the United States.
Share this:
Discover more from Kaieteur News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Similar Articles
2 thoughts on “Mohameds appeal Justice Singh’s ruling in extradition matter”
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
Sir. Ronald Sanders
The GHK Lall Column
Weekend Cartoon
Damn! For an innocent pair, they are sure trying hard to avoid answering questions. They are still to explain how they “earned” all the money that they are spending as well as how they made that little mistake of declaring the value of a US$695,000 car at US$75,000. Plus I believe they are also alleged to have gotten fake remigrants to import duty-free cars and are waiting for the requisite time to pass before they register the vehicles in their names. That would explain their reluctance to register the vehicles with the Guyana Revenue Authority.
The have the right to due process ,you are innocent until proven guilty, and the case with the extradition is on going . Now with one of the Mohamed’s being ill let’s see how the court will function.