HGP Nightly News – The high-stakes legal battle over the proposed extradition of US-indicted businessmen Nazar Mohamed and his son, Azruddin Mohamed, is now headed for a decisive moment, with Acting Chief Justice Navindra Singh setting February 2 to deliver his ruling on their constitutional challenge and judicial review bid.
At the centre of the case is the Mohameds’ attempt to block their extradition to the United States by challenging parts of Guyana’s Fugitive Offenders Act. Their lawyers are seeking to quash the decision of the Minister of Home Affairs to issue the Authority to Proceed, the step that initiated the extradition process against the father and son.
The Mohameds have argued, through their legal team, that the process is allegedly tainted by presumed and apparent bias.But at the close of hearings on Wednesday afternoon, Attorney General Anil Nandlall pushed back hard, telling reporters the claim of bias does not withstand scrutiny. In his submissions, he outlined what he said was the Mohameds’ long-standing alignment with the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) in earlier years, and traced the shift in that relationship after international sanctions were announced.
Nandlall said the court was taken through the implications of the OFAC sanctions and the government’s position at the time: that it would protect Guyana’s economy and financial system, and cooperate with the United States in keeping with Guyana’s international obligations, including AML/CFT and treaty commitments.
He also claimed the relationship between the State and the Mohameds was later severed, and argued that it was only in 2025 that Azruddin Mohamed entered the political arena and began publicly attacking the government. By Nandlall’s account, the bias argument becomes even more problematic because extradition is a statutory process.
He warned that if “politics” could be used to derail extradition, it would create a dangerous loophole where anyone could simply step into political life and then claim bias to escape legal proceedings. He described that idea as “absurd,” arguing it cannot be allowed to become a workable route around extradition law.
The matter comes against the backdrop of June 11, 2024, when the Mohameds and their businesses were sanctioned by the US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) for alleged large-scale corruption, including gold smuggling, money laundering and bribery, with US authorities alleging more than US$50 million in avoided duty taxes owed to the Government of Guyana.
In 2025, Azruddin Mohamed announced his political ambitions and launched We Invest in Nationhood (WIN) to contest the 2025 General and Regional Elections. With arguments now concluded, all sides are awaiting the Acting Chief Justice’s decision on February 2, a ruling that could shape the next phase of the extradition dispute and the wider constitutional questions raised in the proceedings.
