Attorneys for Nazar and Azruddin Mohamed have escalated their challenge to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), demanding urgent disclosure of internal records and asking that CCJ President Justice Winston Anderson take no further part in proceedings involving the two men amid allegations of judicial impropriety and political interference.
The demands were contained in a letter dispatched last Friday, August 14, to the Registrar and Chief Marshal of the CCJ by attorneys Roysdale Forde S.C., Siand Dhurjon and Damien Da Silva. The correspondence followed the July 29 hearing of the Mohameds’ appeal and comes as the regional court faces intense scrutiny over leaked internal communications among its judges. On July 29 the CCJ ruled no bias exists in the issuance of the Minister of Home Affairs’ Authority to Proceed (ATP) on the extradition matter.
The lawyers said the published correspondence raises questions directly connected to their clients’ extradition appeal and argued that the allegations cannot responsibly be ignored.
The controversy erupted after reports in the Trinidad Sunday Express disclosed internal correspondence in which judges reportedly raised serious concerns about the leadership and administration of the CCJ. The CCJ President has since rejected allegations of panel manipulation and attempts to influence judgments, calling them “wholly untrue.” He also said all seven judges were unanimous in the disposition of the Mohamed appeal.
However, the Mohameds’ attorneys pointed specifically to statements attributed to Justice Peter Jamadar and former CCJ President Justice Chile Eboe-Osuji concerning the Mohamed matter.
Jamadar was quoted as describing what he experienced as an attempt to influence colleagues’ opinions “in an authoritative manner,” while Eboe-Osuji was reported as saying:
“Winston tried single-handedly to override judicial independence and long-standing CCJ conventions that guided how decisions are rendered when judges disagreed.”
The lawyers argue that, if substantiated, such conduct would strike at the constitutional right to a fair hearing and the CCJ’s own Code of Judicial Conduct.
They also highlighted allegations made publicly by former Opposition Leader Aubrey Norton concerning Justice Anderson’s involvement in Guyana’s unresolved appointments of a substantive Chancellor and Chief Justice.
The letter also referenced Norton’s allegation that Anderson contacted him regarding the proposed appointments of Justice Navindra Singh as Chief Justice and Justice Roxane George-Wiltshire as Chancellor, and claimed Anderson told him he had been involved in discussions concerning then-acting Chancellor Justice Yonette Cummings-Edwards’ departure.
The attorneys further cited Norton’s claim that Anderson told him he had been with President Irfaan Ali while arrangements concerning the appointments were being discussed.
The lawyers described the allegations as extraordinarily serious because the appointment of Guyana’s Chancellor and Chief Justice is constitutionally linked to the agreement of the Leader of the Opposition.
“The President of the CCJ, like any other judge, has no role under law in the selection or appointment of the Chief Justice and Chancellor.”
They said that, if true, Anderson’s alleged involvement would constitute an unprecedented intrusion into Guyana’s political and constitutional affairs and raise questions about separation of powers and judicial independence.
The timing is particularly significant because the Mohameds are facing extradition proceedings scheduled to resume on September 3 for six full hearing days.
The lawyers said the Regional Judicial and Legal Services Commission’s announcement of a transparent and independent review does not provide their clients with an immediate legal remedy.
They are therefore demanding “full and frank disclosure” of documents, correspondence, emails and other records concerning any alleged impropriety by Anderson or other judges in the Mohamed appeal.
Among their specific demands is that Anderson state in writing whether he discussed with President Ali or other political actors the desirability of Guyana’s sitting Chief Justice or Chancellor remaining in office, whether he communicated with Norton about proposed judicial appointments, whether he participated in negotiations surrounding Cummings-Edwards’ departure and whether he told Norton he had been with the President in connection with those matters.
The lawyers are also asking the CCJ to preserve telephone records, electronic communications, diary entries, itineraries and meeting records involving Anderson, Norton, President Ali, the Attorney General, government representatives and the judicial officers concerned.
Most significantly, they are asking that Anderson take no further part in proceedings involving the Mohameds until the allegations are addressed and resolved.
“Our clients respectfully request that Justice Anderson take no further part in any proceedings concerning our clients unless and until these matters have been fully addressed and resolved.”
The attorneys gave the Court seven days to provide the requested information, warning that failure to do so could result in formal proceedings and applications for relief.
The dispute comes as the CCJ seeks to contain a serious reputational crisis. The Regional Judicial and Legal Services Commission has said the allegations warrant a transparent and independent review, while Anderson has defended his leadership and rejected claims that he manipulated panels or improperly influenced judgments.
The Mohameds’ letter now puts the Court under direct pressure to address not only the broader allegations concerning its internal governance, but whether those concerns could have affected the fairness and integrity of a case directly involving the Guyanese Opposition Leader.
