The Caribbean Court of Justice will deliver its final judgement on July 29 in the extradition case against Guyanese opposition leader Azruddin Mohamed and his father, businessman Nazar Mohamed. The ruling brings to a close a legal battle that has moved through every tier of the Guyanese judicial system before landing at the region's apex court.

The CCJ reserved its judgement following hearings held in April, and has maintained a temporary stay on all local extradition proceedings since then. That pause will lift once the judgement is delivered, one way or another.

At the centre of the case is the Authority to Proceed, an executive order signed by Guyana's Minister of Home Affairs that permits extradition proceedings to move forward domestically. Lawyers for the Mohameds argue the order was signed under conditions of bias and should be struck down as unlawful. Their case rests on the claim that the minister's decision to sign was not a neutral administrative act but one shaped by political considerations against Azruddin Mohamed, who leads the opposition WIN party.

The Guyanese government rejects this characterisation entirely. Attorney General Anil Nandlall, representing the state, has argued that signing the Authority to Proceed is a routine procedural function carried out by the minister as a matter of course, and that no evidence supports the claim of bias. On this reading, the authorisation was lawful and the extradition process should be allowed to continue unimpeded.

The extradition request originates in the United States, where the Mohameds face an 11-count indictment. The charges include wire fraud, mail fraud, conspiracy and money laundering. Both men are also currently subject to US sanctions, a status that has run alongside the criminal proceedings and added further weight to Washington's request for their return to face trial.

The case has followed a defined path since the United States first submitted its extradition request in October 2025. The Home Affairs Minister signed the Authority to Proceed the following day, and Guyanese magistrates issued arrest warrants shortly afterwards. In December 2025, the Mohameds launched a judicial review naming the Attorney General, the Home Affairs Minister and the presiding magistrate, seeking to halt the process before it could advance further.

That challenge failed at the High Court in February 2026, when judges upheld the government's handling of the matter and declined to intervene. The Court of Appeal reached the same conclusion in March, dismissing the Mohameds' case a second time. Within days of that ruling, however, the CCJ agreed to hear a final appeal and granted a temporary stay, freezing the extradition process while it considered the arguments on both sides.

That stay has now been in place for several months, and the July 29 judgement will determine what happens next. Two outcomes are possible. Should the CCJ side with the government, the stay will be lifted and the Georgetown Magistrates' Court will resume committal hearings, the next formal step towards the men's extradition to the United States. Should the court instead find in favour of the Mohameds, the Authority to Proceed will be quashed, halting the current extradition attempt and handing Azruddin Mohamed a significant legal and political victory ahead of the country's next electoral cycle.

The case has drawn close attention in Guyana given Mohamed's position as opposition leader and the timing of the underlying US charges, which surfaced as his political profile was rising. Whichever way the CCJ rules, the judgement will settle a question that has occupied Guyanese courts for the better part of a year and will shape the immediate political and legal standing of one of the country's most prominent opposition figures.

‍