THE Government of Guyana is footing the legal bill for the ongoing extradition proceedings involving United States–indicted businessmen Nazar ‘Shell’ and Azruddin Mohamed, in accordance with international treaty obligations, a practice that is neither new nor unique to this administration.

Official documents seen by this newspaper confirm government approval for a US$62,558 payment to Jamaican King’s Counsel Terrence Williams, who, along with attorneys Herbert McKenzie and Celine Deidrick, was retained to represent the Guyana Police Force (GPF) in the case.

The payment will be processed through the Bank of Guyana.

The Jamaican attorneys, respected across the Caribbean for their expertise in extradition law, were engaged on the advice of Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs Anil Nandlall, S.C., who stressed that the move aligns squarely with international practice and longstanding precedent.

“This is not a new or exceptional arrangement. It is a continuation of the same procedure followed in previous extradition matters under successive administrations. The law and treaties dictate the approach, not the government of the day,” Nandlall explained.

The U.S. Department of State’s Foreign Affairs Manual (7 FAM 1618) clearly establishes that “most extradition treaties require the costs of extradition proceedings (other than translation of documents and costs associated with the transfer of the fugitive) to be borne by the requested country.”

In the ongoing case, Guyana is the ‘requested state,’ and the United States is the ‘requesting state.’
As the requested state, Guyana is legally responsible for the costs associated with the local court proceedings, a position consistent with international law and the United Kingdom–United States Extradition Treaty, which Guyana inherited upon independence in 1966.

Article 13 of that treaty provides that “all expenses connected with the extradition shall be borne by the High Contracting Party making the application.”

However, in practice, and as clarified by the U.S. State Department, the receiving country, the one handling the proceedings, typically absorbs those expenses.

This has been the case in multiple prior extradition proceedings, including under past People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) and A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) administrations, where the State bore the associated costs to ensure compliance with treaty obligations.

The current extradition proceedings stem from a formal request by the Government of the United States of America for the surrender of the father-and-son duo, principals of Mohamed’s Enterprise, who were indicted by a U.S. Grand Jury in the Southern District of Florida on charges including wire fraud, mail fraud and money laundering tied to a US$50 million gold export scheme.

The matter is before Principal Magistrate Judy Latchman at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Courts, where the prosecution has tendered key documents such as a diplomatic note, authenticated statements from the U.S. Secretary of State, and executed warrants of arrest.
Both men remain on $150,000 bail each as the case continues.

Nandlall had previously reiterated that Guyana’s role in funding the legal representation is not a discretionary act or favour to the accused but rather a legal responsibility grounded in international agreements.
“This is a matter of treaty compliance. Guyana, as a sovereign state, must act in accordance with the international conventions and treaties it is bound by,” Nandlall had said.

The extradition hearings are ongoing as Guyana continues to fulfill its treaty-based responsibilities to the United States under the longstanding extradition framework between the two nations.

Minister within the Office of the Prime Minister Kwame McCoy had strongly condemned what he described as a “well-funded machinery of lies” being spread by the Mohammeds.

In a statement on Monday, Minister McCoy accused the father and son of attempting to “mislead the public” and distort the facts surrounding their legal situation. He said their efforts are a desperate attempt to “wriggle out of the criminal entanglement of their own doing.”

“The blatant disinformation peddled by the Mohameds through their dedicated, callous, crass, well-funded machinery of lies attempts to cool the hot water they have found themselves in,” McCoy stated, adding, “It has become so clear that they will stop at nothing to escape accountability.”

The Minister emphasised that the Mohameds’ recent public claims misrepresent the nature of the extradition process, calling their statements “deliberately and desperately false utterances” that “anger anyone with even a basic understanding of extradition law.”

McCoy outlined that extradition proceedings are not equivalent to a criminal trial and do not involve the presentation of witnesses or evidence in the usual sense. Instead, the process operates under treaty obligations between countries.

“Extradition Law is based on arrangements between and among nations; a relationship grounded in comity, mutuality, and reciprocity,” he explained. “As a contracting party to an extradition treaty, Guyana accepts the authenticated documents of a foreign country, such as those issued by the United States in the Mohameds’ case, as valid and binding within the framework of the law.”