Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs Anil Nandlall, SC, has rejected suggestions that Guyana’s government influenced the reported review of High Court Justice Gino Persaud’s United States visa, saying decisions about who can travel to the U.S. rest with American authorities.
Speaking during his weekly programme, “Issues In The News,” on Tuesday, Nandlall responded to businessman Nazar Mohamed’s suggestion of a connection between the judge’s visa difficulties and public criticism of his rulings in tax disputes involving the Mohamed family.
Mohamed had linked President Dr. Irfaan Ali, Vice President Dr. Bharrat Jagdeo and the Attorney General to the review because they had criticised Persaud’s decisions in the Lamborghini and Ferrari tax cases.
“I don’t think that I need to tell you that that’s utter foolishness,” Nandlall said.
He maintained that the Guyanese government had “absolutely no influence whatsoever” over U.S. foreign policy or American government decisions.
“And in particular, certainly, no influence whatsoever in relation to whom the U.S. will permit to travel to the United States of America,” he said.
The attorney general described the suggestion of government involvement as reckless and irresponsible. He said the United States had long exercised sovereign control over who was permitted to travel to its territory.
However, Nandlall offered no explanation for the reported action involving Persaud. He said several journalists had sought his views, but neither the judge nor U.S. authorities had issued an official statement on the matter.
“So I have no informed comment to make on the matter,” he said.
The controversy followed reports that Persaud was prevented from boarding a Miami-bound American Airlines flight from Guyana on Saturday, September 19. According to media reports, airline representatives told him that his name had been flagged and his U.S. visa was under review.
Persaud was travelling with other judges and magistrates to a judicial conference in Jamaica, with his itinerary taking him through Miami.
In his statement, Mohamed questioned the implications of the reported review for judicial independence, pointing to the criticism Persaud had faced after ruling against the state in matters involving his family.
However, Mohamed also expressly stopped short of claiming to know what had prompted the review.
“I will not publicly assert what caused that review without evidence,” he said.
Mohamed argued that judges should be able to decide cases without fearing consequences for their careers, reputations or ability to travel.
He also said neither he nor his son, Azruddin Mohamed, had a personal, professional, social or business relationship with Persaud, and that their connection was limited to family matters that came before him in court.
The tax disputes include Persaud’s November 14, 2025, ruling against the Guyana Revenue Authority’s reassessment of approximately $421 million in taxes on Azruddin Mohamed’s Lamborghini and two Toyota Land Cruisers.
The judge found the additional assessments unlawful and blocked the seizure of the vehicles. He also indicated that the ruling did not prevent the authority from pursuing criminal remedies where fraud was subsequently uncovered. The GRA announced that it would appeal the decision.
Ali and Nandlall publicly criticised that ruling, arguing that assessments conducted after imported goods had been cleared were an important means of recovering taxes owed to the state.
In a separate decision on July 2, 2026, Persaud quashed a $479.7 million tax assessment on Hana Mohamed’s Ferrari and returned the matter to the commissioner general for reconsideration of her reasons for temporary absences from Guyana under the remigrant concession scheme. The GRA has appealed that ruling, challenging the judge’s interpretation of the law and the relief granted.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Embassy has declined to discuss Persaud’s individual circumstances.
