The Mohameds CCJ Ruling was always unambiguous

Aug 14, 2026 Letters

---

Dear Editor,

This ‘fanning for smoke’ by ‘only’ some sections of Team Mohamed is stirring my angst. In fact, it is now mounting as I am digesting, from the dailies, the portent of the caption, “CCJ under pressure as judges’ leaked emails raise questions over independence.” Inhering in the ‘supposed’ news piece is that the ‘internal rift at the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) is spawning suspicions of ‘non-independence and loss of credibility’ of the said CCJ, the region’s highest court.’ This uncalled-for furore revolves around ‘leaked emails’ in which ‘sitting judges are seemingly accusing President Justice Winston Anderson of ‘dictatorial’ leadership, panel manipulation, and attempts to influence judicial opinions.’

So, what do I make of this?

First, it is that in Guyana, especially, the combined opposition, their followers and more so, their legal team have no basis for deeming the CCJ as prejudiced, or pandering to a particular party in the just concluded extradition case, involving the Mohameds and Guyana’s Minister of Home Affairs. The ruling from the CCJ, unanimously too, was that the case can resume, after it was disrupted by a legal challenge from the father and son.

I really want John ‘Foolish’ Public to absorb this. It is that the Mohameds’ formal legal defense team, comprising Senior Counsel Roysdale Forde, along with Siand Dhurjon, and Damien Da Silva, at no time (up to the present) ever accuse or hinted that the CCJ was biased in its ruling. As a matter of fact, following the July 29, 2026 judgment, the attorneys overtly and explicitly welcomed some aspects of the court’s 256-page ruling.

Contrary to this, and like a spoiled and spanked child, Azruddin Mohamed himself, via his various channels, is publicly attacking the integrity of the CCJ ‘after internal judge emails were leaked.’ What is comical and yet dangerous is that the various responses emanating manifest a noticeable divergence between the official legal team and Azruddin Mohamed’s public campaigners, with the latter trying to ‘cook up’ something.

A worthy point to note is that the legal team pointed out that the CCJ judges actually agreed that public statements made by Guyanese Attorney General Anil Nandlall had crossed the threshold into “apparent bias”. (This was an issue that was used to chastise the Honourable Attorney General). Yet, the very court ultimately ruled that the AG’s ‘bias’ (if that was so), did not legally taint the Home Affairs Minister’s separate decision to authorize the extradition).

This is a classic case of being ‘disinterested’ and dispassionate’ regarding any issue in life and not just the courts. In suspecting that Anil swayed Minister Oneidge Walrond is to reduce her to a puppet, and I am glad that the CCJ clearly indicated her ‘independence’ and ‘non-persuaded’ decision.

Secondly, I come to these ‘Allegations of “Panel Fixing”, where the idea is being touted that the CCJ President Justice Winston Anderson attempted, or sought some kind of altering or manipulating of the composition of judicial panels to sway outcomes…”

To this, I submit that these leaked emails do not prove, or even suggest that that the final ruling against the Mohameds was biased or legally compromised. However, they supposedly expose ‘… a fierce internal crisis regarding the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) President’s leadership style and administrative overreach, and in no way even suggests that the substantive verdict itself was infected by bias.

As we all know, long before this leak, the ruling was a Unanimous Verdict. This was never an issue, even though there were procedural disagreements over how the case was being managed administratively. The crux was that ‘all’ the sitting CCJ judges ultimately agreed with the final decision to dismiss the Mohameds’ appeal and clear the path for their extradition.

Legal experts who weighed in on the matter noted that the core of the leaked email fight centered on administrative disputes—such as judicial dress codes, panel assignments, and timing—rather than the integrity or factual evidence of the judgments.

This hushes the argument that ‘the leaks pander toward a lack of fairness and independence. It should silence all seeking to gain ‘political leverage to demand an independent review of the entire CCJ institution.

Let me remind readers that the accusation heaped on the President of the court, regarding ‘directives’ to remove certain judges, has nothing to do with the ‘father and son’ matter that was just concluded. That directive was issued for a different regional matter, the D’Almada v TT, Jamaica and Caricom case.  That was when, on June 26, 2026, Justice Anderson sent an internal email to Justices Chile Eboe-Osuji and Arif Bulkan stating, without prior explanation, that he had “determined that a change in the panel” was “desirable”. This action effectively removed Justice Eboe-Osuji from hearing the D’Almada case.

If I were in the place of the Mohameds, my energies will definitely not be so ill-directed.

Yours truly,

Hargesh B. Singh  

---

• CCJ, Hargesh Singh, Letters, Team Mohamed

---