By Mark DaCosta- Guyana’s constitutional order rests on a simple idea: those who govern, and those who hold them to account, derive their authority from the ballot. Azruddin Mohamed holds a mandate from the Guyanese electorate. He leads the We Invest in Nationhood (WIN) party, which won 16 seats and became the second-largest bloc in the National Assembly, and he was chosen by his parliamentary colleagues as Leader of the Opposition.
Yet on Wednesday, 11 November, he did not take his place in the House. He was in custody at Lusignan Prison, and the Guyana Trades Union Congress (GTUC) says someone within the prison system blocked his participation. That claim sits at the centre of a widening controversy about who may stand between a citizen’s vote and the office it created.
The GTUC‘s argument is stark. No salaried prison administrator has ever faced the voters. Those officials hold appointments, not mandates, and answer to a chain of command, not to the electorate. When an administrative directive, whatever its origin, keeps an elected parliamentarian from the chamber, an unelected functionary has in effect overridden the people’s choice. The GTUC says this holds whatever view one takes of the charges Mr Mohamed faces. The courts decide guilt. Administrators may not decide who sits in Parliament.
The facts are these. Mohamed was remanded on 30 October by the Sparendaam Magistrate’s Court, which refused bail on a charge under the Cybercrime Act. The charge concerns the alleged unauthorised obtaining and sharing of police surveillance footage, and Police Constable Ryan Greene was remanded alongside him. The matter returns to court later, and a High Court bail application has been in progress. Constable Ashton Chappell was subsequently remanded until November 24 for similar offense
The GTUC points out that the offence is bailable and calls his continued detention a breach of his rights. The union is also pressing a second question: Acting Director of Prisons Nicklon Elliot has said publicly that he gave no instruction keeping the Opposition Leader away from the sitting. If so, someone else did, and the GTUC wants that person named and held accountable.
The Congress’ concern goes beyond one man. On 10 November its leadership, President of the GTUC, Norris Witter, and General Secretary Lincoln Lewis, met WIN representatives to discuss human rights and the rule of law. Three days later, police reportedly entered the home of WIN parliamentarian Natasha Singh, and she was detained and released. Her husband, Shane Fordyce, was held and charged with terrorism. The GTUC sees a pattern in which state machinery bears down on the opposition, and it warns that political affiliation must never decide who enjoys the law’s protection.
The Union has also tied this to workers’ concerns. It wants the Former Presidents’ Benefits Bill scrapped rather than merely deferred, arguing that lifelong privileges for ex-office holders cannot be justified while ordinary Guyanese face pressure on healthcare, housing and education.
It also wants the three men charged with murder over the 18 July sinking of the MV Barima released: Captain Kevin Price, Chief Mate Rondell Dwayne Roberts and Goods Superintendent Delon Granderson. Evidence before the Commission of Inquiry has pointed to weak supervision, poor reporting lines and neglect of safety standards. The GTUC says individual workers must not carry blame that belongs to management and institutions.
The argument that links these threads is about authority. The GTUC says that a vote, once cast, creates a legitimacy that no appointed official can claim, and that an election win – and a razor thin one – gives no government unlimited power over citizens. A parliamentarian chosen by tens of thousands of voters should not be at the mercy of a prison administrator’s say-so. Nor should a ship’s crew be punished while the managers who set their working conditions go unexamined.
There is a counter-case, and a fair reading must include it. The prosecution and the authorities say the charges are lawful and that a magistrate, not a politician, refused bail. Remand is a judicial decision that can be challenged in the High Court, and Mohamed has done exactly that. The Guyana Prison Service has rejected his claims of mistreatment and says its records contradict the account of prolonged isolation.
The Honourable Mohamed also faces separate extradition proceedings, following a US request. He was sanctioned by the US Treasury in 2024 over alleged tax evasion and bribery in the gold sector. Government supporters will argue that the rule of law means no one is exempt because of political office. Every person charged, Mohamed included, is presumed innocent until a court decides otherwise.
That is why the demand for transparency matters to both sides. If the Prison Service acted lawfully, the public deserves to know who issued the instruction and under what authority. If it did not, accountability must follow. Our nation’s democracy depends on the answer, and on whether the people’s mandate means more than the discretion of any official.
