Extradition proceedings against businessman and Opposition political figure Azruddin Mohamed continued on Thursday morning at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court, after Principal Magistrate Judy Latchman refused a defence request for an adjournment.
In refusing the application, Magistrate Latchman remarked: “Yesterday is gone, tomorrow is yet to come. Let us proceed.”
The adjournment application was made by defence counsel Siand Dhurjon, who told the court that Mohamed has been heavily engaged in the ongoing National Assembly budget debates, often working until midnight, and would be required to do so again in the coming week during the consideration of estimates.
Dhurjon argued that Mohamed, as Leader of the Opposition, has a constitutional duty to fully participate in parliamentary proceedings, which includes scrutinising budget presentations, listening to extended debates, extracting salient points, and preparing substantive responses — not merely delivering a prepared speech.
“It would be excessive for Mr Mohamed to sit in the National Assembly all afternoon and night, finishing around midnight, and then be expected to attend court proceedings throughout the morning,” Dhurjon stated.
He further informed the court that Mohamed was suffering from a migraine and was on medication, adding that the adjournment request was made in the public interest.
Dhurjon also referenced pending High Court matters, noting that while stays of proceedings were not granted, one related ruling is scheduled for February 16, and another application had only been determined the previous day.
State Prosecutor Terrence Williams strongly opposed the request, arguing that adjournments had become too frequent and that the proceedings were nearing completion.
Williams said there was no clash between the morning court sittings and Mohamed’s parliamentary duties, noting that Mohamed was scheduled to speak in the National Assembly on Friday afternoon, not during court hours.
He further submitted that parliamentary sittings do not override criminal court proceedings, stating that even if Parliament were sitting at the same time as the court, Mohamed would still be required to attend court, particularly given the terms of his recognisance when bail was granted.
“This matter requires reasonable expedition. Every time we appear, a reason is advanced for adjournment. The State has been put to expense repeatedly,” Williams told the court.
Williams also referred to remarks made by the Chief Justice (ag) in dismissing a recent High Court application, noting that costs were awarded and that the application was described as disingenuous.
After hearing submissions, Magistrate Latchman refused the adjournment and directed that the extradition proceedings continue, bringing an end to the defence’s application.
The decision follows Wednesday’s ruling by Chief Justice (ag) Navindra Singh, who dismissed a High Court challenge brought by Azruddin Mohamed and his father Nazar Mohamed, rejecting claims that the Government and senior officials acted with political bias in the extradition process.
The Chief Justice held that the Minister of Home Affairs, in issuing the Authority to Proceed under the Fugitive Offenders Act, acted in a lawful executive capacity, and that allegations of bias were not made out in law. The court also declined to grant a stay of the magistrate’s court proceedings and awarded $500,000 in costs to each respondent.
While a separate constitutional challenge to amendments to the Fugitive Offenders Act remains pending, extradition proceedings before Magistrate Latchman are continuing.
The post Another adjournment request refused, extradition proceedings against Azruddin Mohamed continue appeared first on News Room Guyana.
