How much judicial time will be consumed? — Adron Pires — Opinion

How much judicial time will be consumed?

September 16, 2026·2 min read

Published in

Guyana Times ·Sep 16, 2026

Dear Editor,

The pace of the extradition proceedings involving United States-sanctioned and indicted Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed and his father, Nazar Mohamed, now demands serious public attention.

The Mohameds were arrested on October 31, 2025, following an extradition request from the United States.^[1]

Since then, legal questions arising from the proceedings have travelled through the High Court, the Court of Appeal, and ultimately, the Caribbean Court of Justice. The CCJ delivered its ruling on July 29, 2026, dismissing their challenge and clearing the way for the substantive extradition proceedings to continue.^[2]

Yet, before Chief Magistrate Judy Latchman, the court has been unable to complete the evidence of a single witness.

Matters connected to this case have been argued, considered, and determined by three superior courts, including Guyana’s final appellate court, while the Magistrate’s Court remains occupied with the first witness in the substantive hearing.

Every accused person is entitled to due process, competent representation and a fair hearing. Those rights must be fully respected. They cannot become the basis for proceedings without reasonable limits, repetitive applications, prolonged exchanges, and a timetable that appears increasingly disconnected from the urgency and seriousness of an extradition matter.

The public is entitled to ask how much judicial time will be consumed before the evidence of one witness is completed, how many interventions will be entertained on matters already ventilated before superior courts, and when a firm schedule will be established for the conclusion of the substantive hearing.

Judicial independence must always be protected, and with that independence comes the responsibility to manage proceedings firmly, efficiently and fairly. A court controlling its own process must also ensure that its process is not overwhelmed by delay.

The question before the Magistrates’ Court is whether the legal requirements for committal have been satisfied. The court is not being asked to conduct the trial that may eventually take place in the United States.

Justice must be careful, but justice must also move. When the High Court, the Court of Appeal, and the CCJ can all hear and determine matters arising from an extradition case before the evidence of the first witness is completed in the Magistrates’ Court, the public has every right to question whether the process is being managed with the necessary firmness and urgency.

The judiciary must guard against any appearance that persons with considerable financial resources and large legal teams can stretch proceedings indefinitely. Equal justice requires equal discipline in the management of the court’s time.

Yours truly,
Adron Pires

References

UPDATE: Nazar, Azruddin being processed for U.S. extradition - AG Chambers - News Room Guyana — newsroom.gy ↩
CCJ dismisses Mohameds’ case, extradition proceedings to continue – Demerara Waves Online News- Guyana — demerarawaves.com ↩

UPDATE: Nazar, Azruddin being processed for U.S. extradition - AG Chambers - News Room Guyana

newsroom.gy · 2025-10-31

UPDATE: Nazar, Azruddin being processed for U.S. extradition - AG Chambers - News Room Guyana # UPDATE: Nazar, Azruddin being processed for U.S. extradition – AG Chambers Crime October 31, 2025 Guyanese businessmen Nazar Mohamed and Azruddin Mohamed will be processed for extradition to the United States, the Attorney General’s Chambers confirmed Friday, following a formal extradition request linked to allegations of gold smuggling, tax evasion and financial crimes. Their arrests occurred earlier on Friday morning when members of the Guyana Police Force, acting under a warrant issued by the Georgetown Magistrate’s Court, took the Mohameds into custody. The warrant was issued after a team of lawyers, led by Terrence Williams, KC, along with Herbert McKenzie and Celine Deidrick, presented an Authority to Proceed and an Application for an Arrest Warrant in line with the provisions of the amended Fugitive Offenders Act. The U.S. government, on October 30, 2025, requested the extradition of the father and son under the extradition treaty between Guyana and the United Kingdom, which remains in force in Guyana under Section 4(1)(a) of the Fugitives Offender Act, Cap. 10:04, as amended by Act No. 10 of 2024. The Mohameds are facing multiple charges in the United States, unsealed on October 6, 2025, by a Southern District of Florida Grand Jury. The indictment includes wire fraud, mail fraud, money laundering, conspiracy, aiding and abetting, and customs-related violations connected to an alleged US$50 million gold export and tax evasion scheme. According to the indictment, between 2017 and June 2024, they allegedly conspired to defraud the Government of Guyana by evading export taxes and royalties on over 10,000 kilograms of gold, using falsified customs declarations and reused export seals. The indictment also references an attempted shipment of US$5.3 million in undeclared gold seized at Miami International Airport and the under-invoicing of a luxury vehicle valued at more than US$680,000. Investigations by U.S. authorities reportedly began in the mid-2010s, with law enforcement cooperation with Guyana dating back to 2016–2017. In June 2024, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned the Mohameds and their company, Mohamed’s Enterprise, citing tax evasion, trade-based money laundering, and gold smuggling allegations. In March 2025, Guyanese authorities received a comprehensive evidence dossier from U.S. counterparts under mutual legal assistance arrangements, detailing gold export irregularities, falsified customs declarations, and undeclared shipments seized in Miami. The Mohameds will now be formally processed for extradition to the United States under Guyana’s amended Fugitive Offenders Act, in full compliance with the Constitution and all relevant laws.

CCJ dismisses Mohameds’ case, extradition proceedings to continue – Demerara Waves Online News- Guyana

demerarawaves.com · 2026-07-29

CCJ dismisses Mohameds case, extradition proceedings to continue – Demerara Waves Online News- Guyana # CCJ dismisses Mohameds case, extradition proceedings to continue by Denis Chabrol Thursday, 30 July 2026, 23:02 Nazar Mohamed and his son, Azruddin Mohamed Last Updated on Thursday, 30 July 2026, 23:02 by Writer Nazar Mohamed and his son, Azruddin Mohamed The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) on Wednesday dismissed an appeal by Azruddin Mohamed and his father Nazar “Shell” Mohamed on the grounds that home affairs minister Oneidge Walrond’s Authority To Proceed (ATP) for a magistrate to hear extradition proceedings was infected with political bias. “The substantive appeal is dismissed…T he interim stay of the extradition proceedings imposed by this court on 25th March, 2026, is hereby lifted,” Justice Denys Barrow said. The court also found that Mr Azruddin Mohamed also made politically provocative comments. “Th e second appellant does not have clean hands. He provoked verbal attacks against him by his own earlier attacks against government officials, or his own willing participation in a general brawl of politics,” the judge said. The Mohameds are wanted by the United States (US) to face trial in a federal court for alleged money laundering, wire fraud and mail fraud linked to their gold trading business. The Mohameds were sanctioned in June 2024 by the United States Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control for allegedly evading more than US$50 million in taxes payable to the Guyana government on the export of more than 10,000 kilogrammes of gold. Minister Walrond had issued the ATP on October 30, 2025, a move the Mohameds had challenged, citing political bias based on utterances by her, Attorney General Anil Nandlall, Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo and President Irfaan Ali. The Mohameds had wanted the issuance of the ATP to be delegated to someone else, but the CCJ on Wednesday said that was not legally possible. The CCJ, like the Guyana High Court and Court of Appeal, said issues of bias would have to await the conclusion of the extradition committal proceedings. Justice Barrow said any appeal or judicial review of the ruling on the preliminary objection attacking the ATP should await the completion of the committal proceedings. “It is at the proper time when the challenge to the ATP is ripe for litigation, that the fair-minded and informed observer’s assessment of bias will be fully brought at the appropriate time for the inquiry into bias, the fair-minded and informed observer must consider all the facts and circumstances of the case,” he said, adding that those grounds could include bias or whether the impugned conduct was provoked by the complainant of clean hands in the overall circumstances of the case. The regional court, which is Guyana’s final court, said there was no general right to be heard prior to the issuance of the ATP and no requirement for the minister issuing the ATP to be free from political bias. The court said there was no allegation that the minister omitted to consider a relevant factor, or that she considered an irrelevant one. The CCJ said while her chief legal adviser (Attorney General) to the government must necessarily be circumspect in any comment on extradition requests upon which his advice may be sought, the decision to issue the ATP was statutorily vested in, and was, as a matter of fact, exercised by the minister with very minimal advice from the Attorney General.