Since the United States Government sanctioned Azruddin Mohamed and his father, Nazar Mohamed, on June 11, 2024, Guyana has found itself navigating a period of grave uncertainty. Developments surrounding the Mohameds have attracted undue international attention to Guyana for reasons which the country most certainly would not like to be recognised for at such a crucial time in its development.
Following U.S. Treasury sanctions, the Mohameds’ dynasty was crippled; all of their businesses, including cambios and mining operations, were closed. Banks, insurance companies and other organisations ceased doing business with them. These developments underscore the weight of international sanctions and their ripple effects on local economic and financial actors.
Throughout this development, the 39-year-old Azruddin announced his intention to contest the September 2025 General and Regional Elections, claiming a platform focused, ironically, on “rooting out corruption.” In reality, his candidacy appeared aimed at securing the presidency, a move widely interpreted as a strategy to undoubtedly and indefinitely complicate or delay the impending extradition process.
Can you imagine the consequences if someone under U.S. investigation, facing such serious allegations, were to ascend to the highest office in our land, becoming the face of our democracy and our relationship with the rest of the world? Guyana would have, undoubtedly, been designated a narco-state headed by the same Azruddin Mohamed who is now indicted and awaiting his day in court.
The 11-count indictment in a Florida court came one month after the conclusion of Guyana’s 2025 elections. Both father and son were named. These counts include offences of wire fraud, mail fraud, money laundering, bribery and related conspiracy charges. Later that month, the U.S. government requested their extradition to stand trial.
It must be acknowledged that both men are entitled to due process, as evidenced by their defence in the extradition proceedings. Added to that, adjacent matters have been heard by the High Court, Court of Appeal and will soon be heard by Guyana’s apex court, the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ). There is no denial that due process has been disturbed or denied. That is a fundamental pillar of any democratic society.
However, concerns have been raised in the public domain about the pace and conduct of these proceedings, particularly as repeated delays have emerged as a feature of the ongoing hearings.
What we are witnessing from the Mohameds is not a respect for the judicial process. Instead, it appears to be a coordinated effort to delay proceedings in the Magistrates’ Court, ranging from the father’s reported ill-health to the son’s claim of contracting dengue, accompanied by a doctor’s order for 12 days of rest– an unusual number of days for a dengue diagnosis.
Azruddin claims he is too unwell even to appear virtually, yet just a day before reporting illness, he visited a Mandir in Berbice and interacted with worshippers. Such contradictions raise serious questions about the credibility of these claims and ultimately, the sincerity of their engagement with the legal process.
At the same time, the public narrative being advanced is difficult to ignore. The Mohameds have directed their attacks almost exclusively at the government, while remaining notably silent on the fact that the extradition process arises from Guyana’s international treaty obligations with the United States, the very party making the request.
What we hear now repeatedly from the Mohameds is a claim of PPP political persecution. That selective, politically opportunistic framing is intended to mislead supporters of the Mohameds into thinking that all of their troubles will go away if the PPP is frustrated.
Equally troubling is the Mohameds’ attempt to weaponise the consequences of their sanctions against the judicial system. The spectacle of Azruddin bringing a barrel of coins to the Attorney General’s office to pay court-ordered costs after losing their claim of political bias, which is now being escalated to the CCJ, was neither humorous nor clever. It was a distasteful political stunt, disrespectful to Guyana’s legal system and the public servants who were caught in the tomfoolery.
When asked by Demerara Waves why he paid in coins, Azruddin claimed it was his only option. Yet, his political party, of which he is the leader, recently paid US$250,000 to a U.S. lobbying firm. Did they use coins? Could they not have settled the court costs on his behalf? How, one wonders, does the family pay its legal team? This is not accountability; it is a mockery of the courts and the institutions that uphold them.
Their pretence of concern for ordinary Guyanese is equally hollow. Having grown up in wealth and privilege, the Mohameds cannot claim to understand the struggles of the poor. When Azruddin’s sister, Hana, publicly suggested that the Attorney General only knows about “fancy people things,” it exposed a glaring hypocrisy. She herself lives a life of luxury, with designer clothing, jewellery and high-end vehicles.
The Mohameds’ rhetoric goes beyond personal posturing. Statements such as Azruddin’s comments about “bisexuals and lesbians” entering places of worship are divisive and out of step with the progress Guyana has made in respecting religious freedom and sexual orientation. Most citizens value tolerance and inclusion, yet Azruddin and his circle continue to sow division.
Taken together, their actions and words reveal a pattern: this is not just a legal battle, it is a political strategy aimed at destabilising the country. It carries the unmistakable message: “If I am going down, all of you will go down with me.”