Court of Appeal reserves ruling after hearing extensive submissions in Mohameds’ challenge to extradition law

The Court of Appeal has reserved its decision in the constitutional challenge filed by Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed and his father, Nazar Mohamed, over provisions of the Fugitive Offenders (Amendment) Act, after hearing approximately three hours of legal arguments from the parties on Tuesday.

Acting Chancellor of the Judiciary, Justice Roxane George said the court faces a substantial volume of material that must be considered before a determination can be made.

She disclosed that the submissions and legal authorities presented for consideration exceed 2,000 pages, indicating that the judges would need sufficient time to examine the arguments before reaching a conclusion. Justice George reminded the parties of the court’s one-month deadline for delivering judgments, assuring that every effort would be made to reach a decision after reviewing the extensive submissions and legal authorities.

The appeal centres on whether the provisions of the law, together with guarantees given by the United States, sufficiently safeguard the Mohameds against being transferred to a third country following their extradition.

Attorney General Anil Nandlall defended the legal basis for the assurances, arguing that the existing extradition treaty between Guyana and the United States already contains safeguards against such a transfer without Guyana’s consent. Nandlall relied on Article Seven of the 1931 treaty, maintaining that the provision offers sufficient protection and that the additional guarantees from Washington further strengthen those safeguards.

However, attorney Roysdale Forde disputed that position, arguing that the treaty does not explicitly prohibit onward extradition. He also questioned whether assurances obtained after his clients’ arrests could satisfy legal requirements that should have been met beforehand.

The appeal follows a February 2026 decision by Acting Chief Justice Navindra Singh, who invalidated a provision of the Fugitive Offenders Act but determined that protection against onward extradition was implicit in the existing treaty. The constitutional proceedings are distinct from the extradition case being heard at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Courts.

That matter, initiated following a request by the United States, remains without a final determination while the Court of Appeal considers the constitutional issues.

The extradition proceedings before Chief Magistrate Judy Latchman are continuing on October 21 and 22, but she remains barred by the Court of Appeal from delivering a final decision until the constitutional challenge is determined.

The United States is seeking the extradition of the Mohameds to face charges relating to an alleged US$50 million gold-export tax evasion scheme and the alleged evasion of more than US$1 million in taxes connected to the importation of a Lamborghini.