HGP Nightly News – Did political instructions influence the arrests of Nazar and Azruddin Mohamed? Under questioning in court on Tuesday, Senior Superintendent Prem Narine repeatedly said no.
Defence attorney Siand Dhurjon pressed the Special Branch officer on whether he had been told to act against the Mohameds or destroy notebooks that might show who directed him. Narine rejected both suggestions during his continuing cross-examination in the extradition committal proceedings.
“That is not true,” Narine said when Dhurjon suggested he had been instructed to destroy records concerning the Mohameds. He described a further suggestion—that he had been told to clear his phones of communications with President Irfaan Ali—as “totally wrong.”
Narine acknowledged that he destroyed the notebooks, but said he did so because they contained information about serious investigations. He maintained that the entries concerning the Mohameds were limited to matters such as the times he was present at their arrest locations, and that relevant details were transferred to the backs of the arrest warrants.
The defence challenged the basis for destroying the books. Narine said Standing Order 50 and the Official Secrets Act guided his decision. He acknowledged that Standing Order 28 requires police notebooks to be maintained properly and prohibits pages from being torn out, but argued that the rules governing Special Branch took precedence. Dhurjon questioned him on which specific provision authorised the destruction.
The defence also explored whether statements by senior government officials had influenced Narine’s view of Azruddin Mohamed. Narine said they had not. He told the court he considered Mohamed a national security threat based on information available to Special Branch. The serious allegations he described as forming part of that assessment were not findings made by the court.
Narine acknowledged knowing that Mohamed had contested the 2025 election against the government and that his party won 16 parliamentary seats. When Dhurjon suggested he was not being truthful about his awareness of Mohamed’s criticism of the government, Narine replied: “I am being honest with the court.”
His cross-examination was not completed on Tuesday. The proceedings are expected to continue into November, although the Court of Appeal has stayed any final decision in the committal case until it determines the Mohameds’ constitutional appeal.
