By Travis Chase | HGP Nightly News|
PORT OF SPAIN, TRINIDAD — Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) President Justice Winston Anderson has broken his silence on allegations that he attempted to influence the Court’s handling of the high-profile appeal involving Guyanese businessmen Nazar Mohamed and Azruddin Mohamed, categorically rejecting any suggestion of improper judicial interference.
The clarification was detailed in a nine-page public statement issued on August 14, 2026, following the unauthorized leak and publication of confidential internal correspondence between judges of the regional appellate court.
Internal Deliberations vs. Improper Interference
While declining to re-litigate the merits of the extradition proceedings, Justice Anderson addressed the internal dynamics of the bench during the drafting of the judgment:
- Routine Judicial Disagreements: Anderson acknowledged that judges expressed differing views during deliberations regarding aspects of the legal reasoning and how specific points should be articulated in the final text.
- Standard Conference Process: He maintained that robust, candid exchanges and competing legal analyses are standard practice within the CCJ before settling a final ruling, rather than evidence of misconduct.
- Integrity of the Bench: The CCJ President dismissed claims that he directed the outcome, stating that no judge worthy of sitting on the CCJ bench would allow themselves to be improperly influenced by any colleague, including the Court’s President.
“Any suggestion that judicial views were suppressed or that a judge was directed to reach a particular conclusion is wholly without foundation,” Justice Anderson stated, reaffirming that judicial independence remains an inviolable principle.
Unanimous Disposition by Full Seven-Judge Bench
The central element of Justice Anderson’s defense is his disclosure that despite differing perspectives on specific legal rationale during drafting, all seven sitting CCJ judges were unanimous in the final disposition of the Mohameds’ appeal.
The CCJ ruled that there were no politically motivated grounds to quash the Minister of Home Affairs’ authorization empowering a magistrate to conduct extradition committal hearings for the father and son to the United States.
Condemnation of Leaked Internal Materials
Justice Anderson strongly condemned the leak of private judicial correspondence, warning that breaching the confidentiality of judicial deliberations threatens collegiality and damages public trust in regional jurisprudence:
- Institutional Impact: Breaching internal communications risks distorting normal judicial debate for public sensationalism.
- Ongoing Scrutiny: The statement comes as the regional court addresses administrative challenges, public commentary from Guyanese political figures, and internal governance reviews.
