Dear Editor,
REFERENCE is made to a recent letter from Mr. Jonathon Subrian condemning “persistent ad hominem attacks” against a “particular Magistrate within the Georgetown Magistracy”. He stresses that Magistrates and other judicial officials must never succumb to the “approval” of “social media mobs”.
While Subrian’s vague letter never directly names the Magistrate nor addresses the specific criticisms levelled, it is easy to infer that he is defending Magistrate Judy Latchman following criticism over her repeated adjournments in the Mohamed extradition matter.
Subrian, ANUG’s Chair, is known for his public embrace and association with Mohamed following a pre-election merger pact signed with the WIN party. Since then, he has penned several pieces in favour of Mohamed, and has accompanied him to several court appearances. I will not begrudge his freedom of association, but it is important to address the contradictions in his position.
What Subrian describes as “personalised vendettas” from Government-aligned individuals aimed at assaulting “the integrity of the court” rings hollow in light of Mohamed’s own attacks against multiple tiers of Guyana’s judiciary – all the way to his CCJ appeal. Here are just a few documented examples:
Following his absence from the Magistrate’s Court, Magistrate Latchman revoked Azruddin Mohamed’s bail and ordered his arrest. The younger Mohamed later appeared in court with a grin and handcuffs, declaring: “This is political persecution by the PPP Government.” This is the very Magistrate whom Subrian seeks to defend from supposed Government actors.
On March 24, following the CCJ interim stay, a WIN press statement voiced “deep concern” that the Mohameds were “forced to leave our shores and cross the seas in pursuit of justice that ought to have been fully accessible and protected within our own legal system.” This is a clear attack on the integrity of the Magistrate’s Court, High Court and even the Appeal Court. This very press statement labelled the decisions by all three spheres of Guyana’s judiciary, Chancellor (ag) Roxanne George, as “troubling.”
On March 25, a post on Mohamed’s “Team Mohamed” page wrote: “Imagine swimming the seas to the CCJ under dengue to get justice, you couldn’t even get in your own country as Guyanese citizens.”
Were Subrian to dispose of the politically slanted lens with which he views public affairs, he would see these statements for what they truly are: Coordinated attacks against Guyana’s Judicial Officers.
Finally, Subrian waxes lyrical on criticism against Latchman as “contempt of the court.” Some clarification is needed here. Is he speaking as a commentator? Or is he speaking as a member of WIN’s legal team? His signature bears the title “Esquire”, yet there is no record of him practising law in any jurisdiction. His GECOM voter registration lists him as a photographer.