Principal Magistrate Judy Latchman on Thursday, January 8, 2026-ruled that no further evidence will be allowed in the extradition proceedings against businessman Nazar “Shell” Mohamed and his son, politician Azruddin Mohamed, after defence attorneys objected to what they described as late and piecemeal disclosure by the prosecution. The ruling effectively closed the disclosure phase of the case, with the magistrate cautioning that the proceedings are “not a game of chess,” and the matter was adjourned to February 5 for continuation.
The United States is seeking the extradition of the Mohameds to face an 11-count federal indictment in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, which includes charges of wire fraud, mail fraud and money laundering linked to alleged gold smuggling activities. Both men are currently on $150,000 bail each, have surrendered their passports, and are required to report weekly to the Ruimveldt Police Station.
The state is represented in the matter by Terrence Williams, KC, who is acting on behalf of the requesting authority, the United States, while the Mohameds are represented by a defence team that includes Senior Counsel Roysdale Forde, Damien Da Silva, Siand Dhurjon, and Juman-Yassin Da Silva. During Thursday’s hearing, defence lawyers challenged the attempted introduction of a one-page statement linked to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, arguing that it was submitted after proceedings were already underway.
The case has also attracted public attention due to disclosures that the Government of Guyana approved payment of a whooping US$62,558.78 to Williams and his legal team for work done in the extradition proceedings, a cost being covered through the Ministry of Home Affairs. That payment represented a single-appearance according to the Mohameds. The government has said the payment is consistent with extradition treaty obligations, which require the requested state to bear local legal expenses.
The extradition matter has been marked by repeated legal challenges, including failed attempts by the defence to refer constitutional questions under the Fugitive Offenders Amendment Act to the High Court. Proceedings are expected to resume next month as the court continues to assess whether the legal requirements for extradition have been satisfied.
