Dear Editor,
Without being prejudicial, or expressing a view, on the Magistrate`s decision not to adjourn the Azruddin Mohamed extradition matter to accommodate his attendance in Parliament, on the occasion of the 2026 Budget Debate, here`s how the High Court ruled when a similar request, by Bharrat Jagdeo, for an adjournment was made.
In the case of Alexander vs. Jagdeo et al, which was scheduled for hearing approximately two years after it was filed, including two postponements, an adjournment was granted at the request of Jagdeo on the ground that he was scheduled to attend Parliament to participate in the 2025 budget debate.
The records will reveal that he did not attend that sitting of Parliament on the day for which he sought the adjournment to accommodate his presence in Parliament, and did not attend the hearing when it was subsequently scheduled, approximately four months later. It was heard in his absence, for which no excuse was tendered.
These are but examples of how similar matters are handled, or different people treated, by our judicial system, in its dispensation of Justice.
Yours truly,
Vincent Alexander
