The Government of Guyana has publicly endorsed the police account of the shooting involving Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed and Special Branch head Senior Superintendent Prem Narine, while Mohamed has taken his allegations of an attack and possible evidence tampering to diplomatic missions and international partners, calling for an independent and transparent investigation.
The competing accounts have raised questions about the circumstances surrounding the shooting outside Narine’s home on Barr Street, Kitty, shortly before midnight on October 12, the subsequent arrests of Mohamed and two members of his staff, and the discovery of an unlicensed firearm in their vehicle.
In a press statement issued on October 13, the Government rejected attempts to challenge its account, describing them as efforts to “pervert the facts” and declaring that “the full force of the law will be applied.” It also disclosed that the United States Department of Justice was being kept informed of developments.
The Government said Mohamed and two associates were filming Narine’s residence when gunshots rang out from their vehicle, prompting the senior officer to return fire with his service handgun. Police subsequently intercepted the vehicle and arrested Mohamed, Eugene Thorne and Mario Mohamed. An unlicensed firearm was reportedly found in the car.
However, Mohamed and the two other occupants deny firing at Narine. Mohamed has alleged that police fired at his vehicle and that the firearm was planted. Those allegations have not been independently established, but they raise questions that an impartial investigation must address.
Mohamed appeals to diplomatic community
In a diplomatic brief dated October 13, the Office of the Leader of the Opposition brought the incident to the attention of diplomatic missions and international partners, citing concerns about Mohamed’s personal security, the rule of law and the handling of evidence.
The office alleged that the vehicle carrying Mohamed and his two staff members was struck by five bullets reportedly fired by Narine. It said none of the occupants was injured and maintained that all three categorically denied having fired at the officer.
“This Office is deeply concerned that Senior Superintendent Prem Narine’s claim that he was shot at first may be used to justify what the Leader of the Opposition and his staff maintain was an unprovoked attack against them.”
The diplomatic brief also challenged the circumstances surrounding the firearm’s discovery.
According to Mohamed’s office, the vehicle was initially searched along Vlissengen Road, where no weapon was found. The office further alleged that the three men were physically assaulted during that search and that Narine pointed a firearm at Mohamed and threatened to kill him.
It said the vehicle was subsequently driven to Kitty Police Station by an individual reportedly associated with Narine, despite Mohamed’s objection. A firearm was then reported to have been discovered after the vehicle reached the station.
The office said investigators must establish who had access to the vehicle between the initial search and the subsequent discovery, and whether the chain of custody was properly maintained.
“This Office is concerned that the possibility of evidence being planted to implicate the Leader of the Opposition cannot be dismissed without an independent and thorough examination of the facts.”
The claims of assault, threats and evidence planting have not been independently verified. The police account and the Opposition Leader’s allegations therefore require scrutiny against physical evidence, witness statements and any available surveillance footage.
Government links incident to extradition proceedings
The Government’s statement devoted considerable attention to Narine’s role as a witness in the ongoing extradition proceedings involving Mohamed and his father, businessman Nazar Mohamed, at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court.
It recalled Narine’s sworn testimony that he feared for his safety and that of his family, including his minor son. The Government also repeated allegations that information held by the Guyana Police Force implicated Mohamed in several killings.
These remain allegations, not findings of guilt. Their inclusion in the Government’s response to the shooting raises questions about whether the separate extradition proceedings are being allowed to shape public perceptions of the incident before the evidence has been fully examined.
The Government argued that the shooting could have implications beyond Guyana because the extradition proceedings are preliminary to a potential criminal trial in the United States if Mohamed is extradited.
It said the State had a duty to protect witnesses and the integrity of the justice system, adding that multiple serious criminal offences could arise from the incident.
Calls for transparent investigation
Mohamed’s office has asked diplomatic missions to seek clarification from the Guyanese authorities and encourage an impartial process. It wants investigators to examine the shooting, the legal basis for the arrests, the initial search, the vehicle’s movements and the origin of the firearm.
It has also called for the preservation of CCTV footage, ballistic evidence, police records and witness statements.
The Government, meanwhile, maintains that law enforcement agencies are investigating and that the law must take its course.
The results of ballistic testing, any available CCTV footage and a documented account of the vehicle’s movements could prove critical in resolving the competing accounts.
With the Government backing the police narrative and the Opposition Leader seeking international scrutiny, the credibility of the investigation will depend on whether the authorities can establish the facts through a process that is transparent, impartial and free from prejudgment.
