MOHAMED’S LAWYERS DEMAND RETRACTION OVER GPF’S “FALSE” STATEMENT ON DESTROYED EXTRADITION EVIDENCE
September 18 2026
Defense attorneys representing Nazar and Azruddin Mohamed have delivered a legal ultimatum to Police Commissioner Dr. Clifton Hicken, demanding the immediate and total retraction of a media release issued by the Guyana Police Force (GPF) concerning destroyed evidence in their clients’ extradition committal proceedings.
This move follows an official public clarification posted to the Joint Services media group at 4:57 p.m. by the Director of the GPF Corporate Communications Unit. Titled “GPF Clarifies Media Reports on Records in Mohameds’ Extradition Proceedings,” the police release sought to counter media coverage surrounding destroyed records referenced during the committal hearing before Chief Magistrate Her Worship Judy Latchman at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court.
In its release, the GPF forcefully rejected “any suggestion that documents of evidential value relating to the proceedings were destroyed.” The Force claimed that its lead witness, Senior Superintendent Prem Narine, testified that his personal working notes “had been disposed of in the official incinerator at Special Branch in keeping with established procedures for the disposal of sensitive working documents that were no longer required.” The release added that Narine “testified that the working notes contained no information of evidential value to the committal proceedings and that the relevant information had already been incorporated into his statement.”
However, in a letter dispatched to Commissioner Hicken on September 18, 2026, Senior Counsel Roysdale Forde of Forde, Amsterdam & Lewis blasted the police release as a complete distortion of court records. Writing on behalf of the Mohameds, Forde declared flatly that “the witness gave none of that evidence” and accused the police force of publicly misrepresenting and contradicting the sworn testimony of its own officer while he remains under active cross-examination.
Forde’s correspondence laid out the exact sequence of Narine’s sworn testimony under cross-examination by defense counsel Siand Dhurjon, revealing a contrast to the claims made by the GPF Corporate Communications Unit-
On September 4, Narine testified that he was certain he uplifted the extradition bundle from the Attorney General’s Chambers at “about 9:15” on October 31, 2025, because “I made a record of that time, I am certain about that time,” confirming the entry was made in his “personal diary.” When Dhurjon sought disclosure of the document, Narine admitted, “No sir because of intelligence we cannot keep such records.” Chief Magistrate Latchman then directly asked Narine under oath: “You disposed of the records because of what they may contain?”, to which Narine answered, “Yes madam.”
When cross-examination resumed on September 10, Narine gave detailed evidence regarding how he destroyed three personal books in early January 2026, giving an account that directly refutes the GPF’s claim of an “official incinerator.”
Narine testified: “There is an area in Special Branch compound next to a furnace which is condemned because of its age but we use the area immediately next to that furnace where I placed the shredded document I mentioned along with others and I light them I can’t recall if it’s a lighter or match I used. I light the fire and I kept them under observation until I was satisfied that they are completely destroyed and useless.” Asked if any written policy or standing order mandated burning the records, Narine testified: “As a result of me being a signatory to the secret act of Guyana anything I consider that is a secret and should be destroyed I do that.”
Forde emphasized in his letter that Narine never testified that the documents lacked evidential value, nor that they were burned in an official incinerator, nor that all details were preserved in his statement. In fact, Narine admitted under oath that he “thought” he made notes regarding a critical interaction between a U.S. Marshal, Mr. Sandy Rao, and the defendants, an interaction that appears nowhere in his official police statement or the Brickdam Police Station diary. Forde noted sharply that “what is of evidential value in these proceedings is a matter for the Court, not for the witness or for the Force.”
Characterizing the GPF’s public statement as “a matter of the utmost seriousness,” the defense team has given the Police Commissioner until 9:00 a.m. on Monday, September 21, 2026, to meet five strict condition, full public withdrawal of the statement, published in the exact same manner as the original, identification of the specific officer who drafted the statement and the officer who authorized its release, identification of the factual source for each assertion, specifically whether any came from Senior Superintendent Narine, formal confirmation that all drafts, instructions, inter-agency communications, and records regarding the January 2026 destruction of records at Special Branch have been preserved for court production, and an undertaking that no further public statements concerning evidence will be issued by the Force while the case is pending.
Forde warned that regardless of whether the police comply with the ultimatum, the defense will apply to the Chief Magistrate for witness summonses requiring the communications officers involved to attend court and produce all relevant records, while reserving all rights to approach the High Court over public commentary on pending judicial proceedings.
