The Trinidad-based Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) Tuesday reserved its ruling in the extradition matter involving the Opposition Leader in Guyana, Azruddin Mohamed and his billionaire businessman father, Nazar Mohamed.
‘We are not yet in a position to give a decision on the application before us, therefore we are going to reserve until such time as we are so able,’ said CCJ President, Justice Winston Anderson.
‘Now, the court is of course sensitive and aware of the fact that we are dealing with extradition matters and these should be handled with expedition, but obviously equally we want to give due care and consideration to the arguments that have been put before us and to ensure that the application is given due consideration. So we will have our decision as soon as is reasonably practical,’ he added.
On October 30, 2025, the United States government submitted a request to Guyana seeking their extradition to face an 11 count criminal indictment, including allegations of conspiracy, mail and wire fraud, and money laundering.
Following receipt of the request, Guyana’s Home Affairs Minister, Oneidge Walrond, issued an Authority to Proceed (ATP) under the Fugitive Offenders Act with Magistrate Judy Latchman on October 31, issuing the arrest warrants, formally commencing extradition proceedings in the Court of Committal, which remain ongoing.
But in December last year, the applicants initiated judicial review proceedings against the Minister of Home Affairs, the Attorney General and the Magistrate, challenging the validity of the ATP to proceed and sought a stay of the extradition process.
But their claim was dismissed by the High Court on February 4 this year and by the Court of Appeal on March 17.
The Mohameds are now seeking special leave to appeal to the CCJ, Guyana’s highest and final court and while the High Court and the Court of Appeal refused to stay the extradition proceedings, at a case management conference held on March 25, the CCJ granted an interim stay of the extradition proceedings pending the determination of this application for special leave.
On Tuesday, following the presentation of arguments from all the parties via video conference in which the CCJ had aso ordered, among other things, that the hearing of the application for special leave be treated as the hearing of the substantive appeal, the panel of judges reserved their ruling in the matter.
Justice Winston Anderson said that the interim stay of proceedings will ‘obviously continue until the decision is made by this court on the application’ adding that the CCJ does not seek to regulate public commentary on judicial matters.
‘We are well aware that counsel has a right to free speech and we encourage the exercise thereof, of course. However, statements which are made outside of these proceedings and which could have the effect of undermining the fairness of the proceedings or which could public confidence in the administration of justice should be avoided and we would expect council on both sides to adhere to their professional responsibilities as far as that is concerned.
‘We hope that that issue does not arise for any further comment by this court. But I am pretty sure council understands the need for proper behaviour in this regard and I say counsel of course on all sides,’ Justice Anderson added.