The Office of Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed has taken its concerns over the shooting incident involving him and two members of his staff directly to the diplomatic community, warning that the circumstances surrounding the gunfire, their subsequent arrests and the discovery of a firearm in their vehicle raise serious questions about political security, due process and the possible misuse of state authority in Guyana.
In a diplomatic brief dated October 13, addressed to diplomatic missions and international partners, Mohamed’s office alleged that the vehicle carrying him, Eugene Thorne and Mario Mohamed was struck by five bullets reportedly fired by Senior Superintendent Prem Narine, head of the Guyana Police Force’s Special Branch Unit, outside Narine’s home shortly before midnight on October 12.
None of the three occupants was injured, but the Opposition Leader’s office said the incident could not be treated lightly simply because the men survived.
The brief raises the possibility of a deliberate attempt on Mohamed’s life, noting that Narine has acknowledged firing at the vehicle but maintains that he did so after believing he had been shot at first. Mohamed and his two staff members categorically deny firing at the officer.
The Opposition Leader’s office warned that Narine’s account must not be accepted as sufficient justification for the use of deadly force without an independent examination of the evidence.
“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.”
Questions over firearm discovery
The diplomatic brief places particular emphasis on the circumstances under which police reportedly found a firearm in the vehicle after the three men were arrested.
According to Mohamed’s office, the vehicle was initially searched along Vlissengen Road, where no weapon was found. It further alleges that the occupants were physically assaulted during that search.
The office also claims that Narine pointed a firearm at Mohamed and threatened to kill him.
The brief states that 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 in the vehicle after it arrived at the station.
That sequence, the Opposition Leader’s office argues, demands an investigation into who had access to the vehicle and whether the integrity of the evidence can be guaranteed.
“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.”
Mohamed has also publicly alleged that the weapon was planted. His attorney, Siand Dhurjon, has questioned how a firearm could have been found beneath the accelerator when the earlier search reportedly failed to uncover it. These allegations have not been independently established.
The police, meanwhile, reported finding an unlicensed .32 Taurus pistol without a serial number and three live rounds of ammunition in the vehicle. Investigators also recovered a .32 spent shell and four 9mm spent shells near Narine’s residence. The items were submitted for ballistic testing, while investigators are expected to review CCTV footage.
Diplomatic intervention sought
The brief states that Mohamed’s vehicle is known to the police and that Special Branch officers regularly follow the Opposition Leader. It questions the security circumstances surrounding the encounter and calls for a transparent account of the events leading to the shooting.
Mohamed’s office is asking diplomatic missions to monitor the investigation, seek clarification from the Guyanese authorities and encourage the preservation of all relevant CCTV footage, ballistic evidence, police records and witness statements.
The incident has also unfolded against the backdrop of extradition proceedings involving Mohamed and his father, businessman Nazar Mohamed. Narine has testified in those proceedings, adding to the sensitivity surrounding an incident involving the head of the Special Branch.
The Government has defended the police account, stating that the occupants’ vehicle was involved in the incident and warning that the law must take its course. The competing accounts now place significant weight on the forensic evidence and the credibility of the sequence of events reported by both sides.
Mohamed’s office maintains that the incident reflects a broader pattern of what it describes as victimisation of the Opposition Leader and his We Invest in Nationhood (WIN) movement.
It warned that the safety of opposition officeholders and their ability to perform constitutional duties without threats or intimidation must concern both Guyanese and the international community.
“Guyana must not drift towards a political environment in which violence, intimidation, or the perceived misuse of state institutions undermines the ability of elected representatives to fulfill their constitutional mandate.”
The office is calling for a thorough, impartial and transparent investigation, insisting that the circumstances of the shooting, the arrests and the disputed discovery of the firearm must be established before conclusions are drawn.
The central questions remain whether the use of force was justified, how the firearm came to be found in the vehicle and whether the evidence was handled in a manner that can withstand independent scrutiny.
