Mohameds’ lawyer rubbishes Datadin’s ‘no bail’ for extradition cases

Last Updated on Sunday, 2 November 2025, 12:06 by Writer

Attorney-at-law Siand Dhurjon, representing Azruddin and Nazar Mohamed who are wanted in the United States for trial for alleged financial crimes, on Saturday lashed back at Attorney-at-law Sanjeev Datadin for saying those fugitives should not have been granted bail because of a constitutional prohibition.

But Mr Datadin said the High Court, as a court of unlimited jurisdiction, can grant bail under the Fugitive Offenders Act, while the Bail Act refers to bail by the Magistrates’ Court.

Mr Dhurjon, in reaction, said, “Had he (Datadin) been privy to our bail application yesterday (Friday) afternoon, he would not have made such a crucial error of law and misadvised his political superiors and FB (Facebook) followers lol (laugh out loud).”

Section 3(1)(b) of the Bail Act says that bail under that Act is applicable to “an extraditable offence under the Fugitive Offenders Act.”

The Mohameds were on Friday each granted GY$150,000 bail by Principal Magistrate Judy Latchman pending the hearing and determination of the U.S.’ extradition request that the Guyana government said it received on October 30.

Mr Datadin cited Article 139(i) that he said specifically permits the loss of liberty in extradition proceedings.

Article 139 (1) (i) of Guyana’s Constitution states that “No person shall be deprived of his or her personal liberty save as may be authorised by law…for the purpose of preventing the unlawful entry of that person into Guyana, or for the purpose of effecting the expulsion, extradition or other lawful removal of that person from Guyana or for the purpose of restricting that person while he or she is being conveyed through Guyana in the course of his or her extradition or removal as a convicted prisoner from one country to another.

The Mohameds return to court on November 10, 2025.

While Mr Datadin said “there was no previously reported case in which a magistrate hearing extradition proceedings had granted bail,” Mr Dhurjon recalled that earlier this year he successfully defended Junior Da Silva in extradition proceedings in which the Brazilian government had sought his extradition and Magistrate Clive Nurse lawfully granted bail. “Those subjected to extradition proceedings have no unqualified hindrance to receiving bail from a magistrate such as those accused of murder or treason,” he added. Similarly, the lawyer said Vitesh Guptar successfully defeated his extradition proceedings while he was on bail.

Mr Dhurjon also pointed to Section 15(2) of the Fugitive Offenders Act that deals with extradition proceedings which states that, “for the purposes of proceedings under this section, a court of committal shall have the like jurisdiction and powers, as nearly as may be, including power to remand or admit to bail, as a magistrate conducting a preliminary inquiry has.”

“It is regrettable that Mr Datadin is not au fait with the laws of bail in matters of extradition as he likely never dealt with extradition in his practice prior. Not even the prosecutors yesterday (Friday) made such an outrageous allegation – that bail in extradition matters was constitutionally prohibited or that the request for extradition rendered the Mohameds’ “non-bailable”.

Mr Dhurjon said even in the United States, the Mohameds would be entitled to bail for wire fraud, mail fraud and/or money laundering altogether.

Attorney General Anil Nandlall said the next step is for the State to disclose to the defence lawyers the paperwork that was received from the U.S. so that they could prepare for the hearing. “This Magistrate needs to be satisfied that, based on the evidence provided, that there is sufficient material and sufficient evidence to commit these people to stand trial in the United States,” he said.

The Mohameds were sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control in June 2024 for allegedly evading US$50 million in taxes payable to the Guyana government for more than 10,000 kilograms of gold exports.

Earlier this month, a U.S. grand jury indictment against the Mohameds was unsealed paving the way for the extradition request.

The Attorney General dismissed claims in certain quarters that the moves against the Mohameds were politically motivated. He noted that the government brought in the Jamaican lawyers to provide “diligent and competent service” and that the matter is not perceived to be politically influenced or driven.