CCJ dismisses Mohameds’ case, extradition proceedings to continue

Last Updated on Wednesday, 29 July 2026, 15:04 by Denis Chabrol

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…The 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. “The 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  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 to the government (Attorney General) 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.