Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed remained in police custody Wednesday following a late-night operation involving the Guyana Police Force, Guyana Defence Force and Coast Guard that began with the search of his private vessel and ended with his arrest — prompting allegations that state agencies are being used to intimidate and politically obstruct the country’s Opposition Leader.
The confrontation unfolded at about 10:15 p.m. Tuesday at Mohamed’s wharf at Friendship, East Bank Demerara, where he was aboard a privately owned vessel with WIN parliamentarians Odessa Primus and Natasha Lewis. Tabitha Sarabo-Halley, Dawn Hastings-Williams and Deon LaCruz were also present.
According to a statement issued on Mohamed’s behalf, officers requested permission to search the vessel. When asked for the basis of the search, the officer in charge reportedly cited “reasonable suspicion” of illegal activity.
The vessel was subsequently disconnected from the wharf and towed to the Marine Wing of the Ruimveldt Police Station, where it was searched.
“Nothing illegal was found on the vessel,” the statement said.
Yet the search quickly became a detention and then an arrest.
Search Ends, Arrest Begins
Police reportedly told Mohamed that the vessel was being detained because relevant documentation had not been produced. The opposition leader requested written confirmation of the detention but was instead asked to sign a statement prepared by police. He declined.
He was then informed that he was under arrest pursuant to the “Maritime Act”.
When Mohamed asked the officer to identify the specific provision under which he was being arrested, the officer allegedly could not do so and, after “sucking his teeth”, repeated that the arrest was being made under the “Maritime Act”.
The issue of documentation is not insignificant. Guyana’s Maritime Administration Department (MARAD), established under the Guyana Shipping Act 1998, is responsible for registering and licensing ships, certifying seafarers and enforcing maritime legislation.
The Shipping Act itself contains extensive provisions governing the registration and licensing of ships.
Police-related reports said Mohamed could not produce the vessel’s registration, certificate of fitness and captain’s licence.
That could explain regulatory action against the vessel. But it does not, on its own, answer the more fundamental question now surrounding Mohamed’s arrest: what specific law and provision authorised his personal detention?
Two Versions, One Explosive Confrontation
The police account differs significantly from Mohamed’s version.
The Guyana Police Force said Joint Services ranks, while on patrol and acting on information received, observed the vessel travelling along the Demerara River toward Friendship at about 9:50 p.m. Police said officers signalled the vessel to stop, but it allegedly failed to comply and sped away, triggering a pursuit.
Police also reported that a bag was seen being thrown from the vessel into the Demerara River. Its contents and the identity of the person who allegedly threw it had not been established.
Mohamed’s statement, however, says the vessel was already docked when the servicemen arrived and that he was not operating it.
Demerara Waves reported that Mohamed acknowledged he could not immediately produce the vessel’s registration, certificate of fitness and captain’s licence.
The conflicting accounts leave critical questions unanswered: Was the vessel actually pursued after refusing an order to stop? What prompted the initial intervention? Was a bag thrown overboard? What was the basis of the reported “reasonable suspicion”? And why, after the search reportedly found nothing illegal, was Mohamed himself arrested?
The answers are particularly important because this is not the first recent maritime confrontation involving Mohamed.
Earlier this month, Coast Guard personnel stopped a vessel carrying Mohamed and WIN parliamentarians Dawn Hastings-Williams and Tabitha Sarabo-Halley on the Pomeroon River after the captain reportedly failed to produce required licensing and certification. The GDF described that operation as part of routine maritime safety enforcement.
The latest confrontation comes after Mohamed and WIN parliamentarians travelled to Port Kaituma and Mabaruma to meet survivors and relatives of victims of the MV Barima disaster.
That tragedy has become a major political flashpoint, with opposition figures sharply criticising the government’s handling of maritime safety and its response to victims and survivors.
The Rule-of-Law Question
Mohamed’s camp argues that the circumstances amount to selective enforcement and the “potentially politically motivated use of state agencies and resources” against the Opposition Leader.
“We are deeply concerned that what should be a lawful and transparent enforcement process has instead evolved into an apparent attempt to harass, intimidate, and obstruct the Leader of the Opposition through the use of state power,” the statement said.
The opposition is demanding that authorities identify the specific law, the specific provision relied upon and the factual basis for the arrest.
That demand puts the spotlight on a basic principle of law enforcement: state power must be exercised under identifiable legal authority, not simply invoked through a general reference to a statute.
The controversy is therefore no longer simply about an undocumented vessel or an alleged failure to stop.
It is about whether the State can clearly demonstrate why a sitting Opposition Leader was detained, why his vessel was seized, what offence he is suspected of committing and, most importantly, what precise legal provision justified his arrest.
Until those questions are answered, Tuesday night’s operation will remain a politically explosive test of Guyana’s commitment to transparency, proportionality and the rule of law.
