High Court rejects US-indicted Mohameds’ attempt to halt extradition proceedings

…path cleared for hearing to continue today

Chief Justice (acting) Navindra Singh on Monday refused an application for a stay in the case involving United States (US)-indicted businessmen Nazar and Azruddin Mohamed, clearing the way for extradition proceedings to continue before the Georgetown Magistrates’ Courts today. The decision allows the substantive extradition hearing before Principal Magistrate Judy Latchman to proceed as scheduled. Meanwhile, the High Court is expected to reconvene on January 14 to rule on a constitutional challenge that the Mohameds’ have mounted against Guyana’s extradition laws, challenging the Fugitive Offenders (Amendment) Act, particularly the Authority to Proceed (ATP). Despite the ruling, attorneys for the Mohameds have indicated that they will be appealing the decision. Lead counsel for the Mohamed’s, Roysdale Forde told reporters that an appeal to the Full Court will be filed later Monday or by Tuesday morning, where the application for a stay of Magistrate Court proceedings will continue to be pursued. Forde made it clear that the ultimate goal is to halt the proceedings from going forward in any way, saying “The stay has not been granted, but there are other strategic steps that we will consider tomorrow [today] to bring these proceedings to some degree of a halt so that these issues can be properly determined. There are a number of different proceedings which we intend to file.” According to Forde the matter would be a “long and arduous” one and could ultimately reach the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).

Attempts to delay extradition
However, speaking with the media outside of the court after the ruling, Attorney General Anil (AG) Nandlall maintained that many of the arguments in Mohameds’ High Court challenge are pre-emptive and simply a guise to delay the extradition process. Nandlall related that the arguments advanced by the defence were premature and improperly brought before the conclusion of the committal proceedings. “The policy and intent of the law do not contemplate these types of challenges being brought before the committal hearing. The decision of the learned Chief Justice is in alignment with the policy of the law, the provisions of the law and the existing judicial authorities in Guyana, across the Caribbean, North America, and the Commonwealth on this matter,” Nandlall explained. He noted that extradition law provides an elaborate framework for challenges after a committal order is made, including built-in mechanisms that stay extradition while appeals and reviews are being pursued.

“These are commonly referred to as interlocutory matters. Applications that tend to delay and protract the committal hearing from taking place. The courts have universally and unequivocally rejected any type of intervention that seeks to stay, stop or delay the committal hearing. The reason is that, following the committal hearing, there exists an elaborate regime of challenges provided by law for any party aggrieved by the rulings of the committal court. Either side may invoke these procedures, and within that regime there is a built-in mechanism that stays the extradition process while such challenges are being exercised,” Nandlall noted. According to the AG, the same constitutional and legal arguments raised in the High Court would inevitably be re-litigated after the Magistrate rules on committal.
“The truth of the matter is that these proceedings are intended to delay the completion of the Magistrate’s process. Assuming that a committal order is made, these identical challenges will be filed again. That is why I say the prior challenges amount to an abuse of process,” he noted.

Frivolous and vexatious
Latchman had ruled that the arguments presented by the Mohameds’ attorneys had already been settled by Guyana’s higher courts and did not warrant further consideration at the magistracy level. She described the defence’s application as both “frivolous and vexatious” and characterised it as “an abuse of the process” in her December 10 decision. Mohameds’ High Court challenge to the constitutionality of the extradition was filed just days after Magistrate Latchman dismissed a similar constitutional application by the Mohameds seeking to have their extradition case referred to the High Court. In a December 10, 2025 ruling, Latchman found that the issues raised had already been settled by higher courts and did not warrant further consideration at the magistracy level.
The Mohameds are seeking to block their extradition to the US, where they have been indicted by a federal grand jury in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida on 11 criminal charges, including wire fraud, mail fraud, tax evasion and money laundering. The charges are linked primarily to alleged irregularities in gold exports to the US through their company, Mohamed’s Enterprises. The extradition of the Mohamed’s is being sought under the Guyana–United Kingdom (UK) extradition treaty, which continues to operate in Guyana pursuant to Section 4(1)(a) of the Fugitive Offenders Act, Cap. 10:04, as amended by Act No. 10 of 2024. The request was formally submitted by the US Government on October 30, 2025. If convicted, most charges carry a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison and fines of up to US$250,000, while the money laundering charge carries a fine of US$500,000 or the value of the laundered property.
The indictment follows sanctions imposed over a year ago by the US Government on the Mohameds, their businesses and the then Home Affairs Ministry Permanent Secretary (PS) Mae Thomas in relation to the same allegations. The sanctions are related to the evasion of taxes on gold exports, with the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) noting that between 2019 and 2023, Mohamed’s Enterprise omitted more than 10,000 kilograms (kg) of gold from import and export declarations and avoided paying more than US$50 million in duty taxes to the Government of Guyana. Meanwhile, with no stay currently in place, the extradition proceedings are set to resume before Magistrate Latchman today.