— follows magistrate’s repeated warnings over commentary on family’s extradition case

GUYANESE-CANADIAN attorney Selwyn Pieters has called for Chief Magistrate Judy Latchman to exclude Hana Mohamed from the courtroom over Facebook posts concerning her family’s ongoing extradition proceedings.
Pieters made the call following another warning from the Chief Magistrate to Hana, the sister of Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed, over social-media commentary connected to the extradition case involving Mohamed and his father, businessman Nazar Mohamed.

In a recent Facebook post, Pieters wrote: “Maybe it’s time for Chief Magistrate Judy Latchman to exclude Hana from her courtroom. This posting about the state witness, who already complained of being fearful, is not helpful.”
His comment followed proceedings on September 4, during which Chief Magistrate Latchman again cautioned Hana against making social-media posts concerning matters connected to the extradition case.
The issue arose during the testimony of Senior Superintendent of Police Prem Narine, Head of the Guyana Police Force’s Special Branch and a witness for the prosecution.
Narine told the court that he considered a post made from the “Hana Khamelia” Facebook account to be threatening and defamatory. He also indicated that he had previously been the subject of posts from the account.
The senior police officer told the court that he feared for his life and the safety of his family.
The concerns prompted Chief Magistrate Latchman to call Hana before the bench and question her about whether she was responsible for the post.
“Where is Miss Hana?” the chief magistrate asked before instructing her to come forward.
“Now, Miss Hana, you posted that on Facebook?” Latchman asked.
Hana did not answer the question, explaining that her lawyer had instructed her to “stay silent.”
The chief magistrate subsequently issued a direct warning against further posts.
“Please kindly stop posting. If you are doing it, you need to stop it. Ok. I don’t want to see any more posts coming from Miss Hana,” Latchman said.
She further told Hana that if she knew who was responsible for the posts, she should advise that person to stop and urged the individual responsible to apologise to Narine.
Following the September 4 warning, Hana subsequently made another post criticising Narine’s testimony, describing him as “lying and treacherous” and mocking his claim that he feared for his life.
COURT WARNS PARTIES
Concerns about social-media commentary were also raised by prosecuting attorney Glenn Hanoman, who told the court that he believed the person operating the “Hana Khamelia” account was “obsessed” with him.

Hanoman described some of the posts as “vile” and accused the account operator of misconstruing evidence presented in court.
“Hana Khamelia mentions me almost every day. I don’t want her husband to come after me,” Hanoman told the court.
The defence, led by Senior Counsel Roysdale Forde, challenged Narine’s characterisation of the Mohameds after the Special Branch head described them as “dangerous people” who were “capable of anything.”
Another attorney representing the Mohameds, Siand Dhurjon, said anyone aggrieved by social-media posts could seek legal recourse through a lawsuit.
Latchman nevertheless warned all parties against commenting on matters before the court on social media and urged the Mohameds’ attorneys to advise their family members against engaging in such conduct.
She also cautioned the parties against allowing Facebook posts to distract from the extradition proceedings, stressing that the case must be determined on the evidence presented before the court.
The September 4 warning was not the first time concerns had been raised over Hana’s social media activity surrounding the proceedings.
On March 13, Chief Magistrate Latchman warned Hana against posting sensitive information from the extradition hearing online.
Then, on April 16, the Supreme Court of Judicature cleared members of its judicial staff after Hana had incorrectly linked them to the state’s legal team in a social-media post concerning the extradition matter.

The Supreme Court stressed the importance of accuracy in public statements concerning the judiciary, warning that misinformation could undermine public confidence in the justice system. It also noted that Hana subsequently corrected the inaccurate statement.
Meanwhile, Narine’s evidence forms part of the prosecution’s case against Azruddin Mohamed and his father, Nazar Mohamed, who are wanted by the United States to face an 11-count federal indictment.
The allegations include wire fraud, mail fraud, money laundering and related offences arising from an alleged scheme to evade taxes and royalties on Guyanese gold exports.
The extradition hearing is expected to continue on September 21 at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Courts.