Mohamed challenges remand in High Court amid cybercrime and obstruction charges
November 6 2026
The legal battle involving Opposition Leader and We Invest in Nationhood party founder Azruddin Mohamed has further intensified following his recent remand to the Lusignan prison. Mohamed filed an affidavit in the high court through his mother, Bonita Mohamed, seeking urgent bail and challenging what he describes as politically motivated persecution.
The constitutional motion names the director of public prosecutions, Magistrate Abigail Gibbs, and the Attorney General as respondents.
The legal fallout stems from a dramatic sequence of events on October 12, 2026, when Mohamed, along with his driver and videographer, was travelling past the Barr street, Kitty home of Senior Superintendent of Police Prem Narine. Mohamed stated that he was responding to public complaints regarding the unnecessary stationing of police resources outside Narine’s residence. According to court documents, gunshots rang out around midnight, leading to an interception at the junction of Sandy Babb street and Vlissingen road where Narine and masked officers allegedly opened fire on their vehicle.
Subsequent searches at the scene yielded nothing of evidential value, but a later search at the Kitty police station at approximately two-twenty in the morning resulted in officers allegedly discovering a small point-thirty-two handgun under the accelerator pedal.
Mohamed and two others were subsequently slapped with charges including unlawful possession of a firearm, unlawful possession of ammunition, and an attempt to obstruct the course of justice by discharging a firearm near Narine’s dwelling house.
The charges allege an attempt to interfere with Narine, who is a key witness testifying in ongoing extradition proceedings involving Mohamed and his father, Nazar mohamed, requested by the United States government.
The controversy deepened on October 30th, 2026, when Mohamed and police constable Ryan Greene were jointly charged before Magistrate Abigail Gibbs at the Sparendaam Magistrate’s Court with the unauthorised obtaining and giving of electronic data under the Cybercrime Act.
The prosecution alleged that Greene provided closed-circuit television footage from the Police Force Command Centre in Liliendaal to Mohamed via a flash drive. During the bail hearing, Senior Counsel Roysdale Forde and Siand Dhurjon argued that public cameras capturing public events cannot constitute private data and that Mohamed had lawful justification to receive the footage to defend himself against serious criminal allegations.
Dhurjon further submitted that the prosecution amounted to an abuse of process under the protected disclosures act, arguing that the state was attempting to punish individuals for exposing improper conduct.
Despite these submissions, Magistrate Gibbs refused bail, stating in the case jacket that “this court is concerned with the serious nature of the offence for which the defendants are charged” and noting that given the extradition matter and other pending charges, “if bail is granted he is likely to commit another offence”.
In his high court affidavit, Mohamed also detailed harsh conditions at building five of the Lusignan prison, describing his cell as “as hot as a furnace,” poorly ventilated, illuminated by a non-stop bright white light with no switch, and plagued by smoke and fumes from a nearby burning dumpsite. Describing his solitary confinement and strict visitation limits, Mohamed’s legal team is pressing the High Court for his immediate release pending trial.
Previously, the High Court became the theater of a major legal clash when Attorney General Mohabir Anil Nandlall, SC, launched a counter-application to strike out massive swathes of the initial sworn statement filed by Mohamed’s mother, Bonita Mohamed. Appearing before Justice Priscilla Chandra-Haniff, the Attorney General argued that 140 of the document’s 146 paragraphs violated evidentiary rules, characterising it as inadmissible hearsay and “one of the worst drafted affidavits” he had seen. In response, defense attorneys Roysdale Forde, SC, and Siand Dhurjon accused the State of deploying technical maneuvers to stall proceedings, while the court granted the defense leave to file a fresh affidavit directly in Mohamed’s name to move the matter forward on its merits.
