Extradition proceedings against Guyanese businessman and politician Azruddin Mohamed and his father, Nazar Mohamed, will move forward in the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court after acting Chief Justice Navindra Singh rejected an application to halt the case.
The ruling clears the way for the Magistrates’ Court to continue hearing the extradition matter, despite indications from attorneys representing the Mohameds that they intend to appeal the decision.
The applicants had asked the High Court to stay the proceedings while they challenged the constitutionality of amendments made to the Fugitive Offenders Act in 2009. Arguments on the application for a stay were heard last Thursday, with Senior Counsel Roysdale Forde contending that the circumstances warranted pausing the Magistrates’ Court process until the constitutional issues were resolved.
Attorney General Anil Nandlall strongly opposed the application, arguing that it formed part of a deliberate effort to delay the extradition process. He told the court that extradition law is well-settled and that no compelling legal grounds were advanced to justify stopping the committal hearing.
Following the High Court’s ruling on Monday, Nandlall said the Chief Justice’s decision was consistent with the policy intent of the law and supported by judicial authorities in Guyana, the wider Caribbean, North America and the Commonwealth. He noted that courts have repeatedly rejected interlocutory applications aimed at staying or delaying extradition proceedings before the completion of a committal hearing.
Nandlall explained that the legal framework already provides extensive avenues for legal challenges after a committal decision is made.
“Clearly, the scheme of the law, the intent of the law to allow the extradition process to be fluid and for those who are aggrieved by it to invoke the remedial provision that the law permits for challenges to take place but in a manner contemplated and provided for by the law,” Nandlall told reporters.
The court has indicated that it will hear the substantive constitutional challenge on January 14. On the same date, the court is also expected to consider a separate application filed by the Mohameds, alleging that the government is biased against them due to political rivalry and therefore lacks the authority to extradite them.
“The truth of the matter is that these, as I said before are all proceedings intended to delay. When the Magistrate’s process is completed, assuming that an order of committal is made, these identical challenges will be filed against,” Nandlall said, describing the multiple applications as an abuse of process.
Following Monday’s ruling, Senior Counsel Roysdale Forde said the defence team was disappointed and intends to appeal to the Full Court.
“We are disappointed that the Chief Justice did not find that on the arguments and have a regard to the circumstances of this case that a stay was warranted in the circumstances,” Forde said.
“We disagree with the decision respectfully and we will be filing an appeal to the Full Court and we will be seeking a stay of the proceedings at the level of the Full Court,” he added.
Forde said the appeal would be filed later Monday or Tuesday morning.
“The stay has not been granted but there are other strategic moves that we will make tomorrow to bring this proceedings to some degree of a halt so that these issues can be determined,” he said, cautioning that the matter is likely to be a long and arduous process that could advance to the Court of Appeal and ultimately the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), regardless of whether a stay is granted at this stage.
The Mohameds remain on $150,000 bail each.
The United States government requested the extradition of the father and son on October 30, 2025, under the extradition treaty between Guyana and the United Kingdom, which remains in force in Guyana under Section 4(1)(a) of the Fugitive Offenders Act, Cap. 10:04, as amended by Act No. 10 of 2024.
They are facing multiple charges in the United States following an indictment unsealed on October 6, 2025, by a Southern District of Florida grand jury. The charges include wire fraud, mail fraud, money laundering, conspiracy, aiding and abetting, and customs-related violations linked to an alleged US$50 million gold export and tax evasion scheme.
