Businessman Nazar Mohamed and his son, Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed, have filed an urgent Notice of Motion in the Court of Appeal seeking an immediate stay of the ongoing extradition proceedings against them, pending the outcome of their substantive appeal.
In the motion, the father and son duo is asking the appellate court to halt proceedings in the committal court presided over by Magistrate Judy Latchman in matters numbered 4716 of 2025 (United States of America v. Nazar Mohamed) and 4717 of 2025 (United States of America v. Azruddin Mohamed) until their appeal is determined.
They are also seeking an order for their appeal to be heard urgently, and are asking the court to consider treating the motion hearing as the appeal hearing if it deems fit.
According to the court filings, the Mohameds had earlier approached the High Court by Fixed Date Application on December 23, 2025, challenging the issuance of an “Authority to Proceed” (ATP) dated October 30, 2025, issued under the Fugitive Offenders Act, Cap. 10:04, which triggered the extradition process.
The applicants state that Acting Chief Justice Navindra Singh dismissed their judicial review application on February 4, 2026, and also dismissed an application for a stay of the committal proceedings, ordering $500,000 in costs to each of the three respondents, Home Affairs Minister Oneidge Walrond, the Attorney General, and Magistrate Judy Latchman, to be paid by February 27, 2026.
The Mohameds filed a Notice of Appeal on February 5, 2026, and are now pursuing urgent relief in the Court of Appeal.
In their motion and supporting affidavit, the Mohameds argue that the ATP was unlawful and a nullity because it was allegedly issued in breach of natural justice, specifically, the principle of bias (nemo judex in sua causa).
They contend that Minister Walrond was automatically disqualified from issuing the ATP due to her political role and association with the governing PPP/C, and that a “fair-minded and informed observer” would conclude there was a real possibility of bias.
They further allege that the Attorney General was also biased, citing public statements and claiming that his role in advising on the ATP improperly influenced the decision-making process.
The filings also set out claims of political persecution, asserting that senior government figures publicly vilified Azruddin Mohamed and intensified criticism after he indicated interest in contesting elections and later became Leader of the Opposition.
The applicants say these statements undermined the presumption of innocence and prejudiced their rights.
The documents state that the United States requested the extradition of the Mohameds to face an 11-count indictment, including allegations of conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud, mail fraud, wire fraud, and money laundering.
The filings further claim the allegations relate, in large part, to accusations that the applicants defrauded Guyana through gold-related tax and royalty issues, and also reference an allegation tied to documentation about the value of an imported vehicle.
