—Chief Magistrate warns, ‘These are innocent people’ amid Facebook posts involving witness’s family

CHIEF Magistrate Judy Latchman on Tuesday warned against the posting of images of children and other family members on social media amid a complaint by Senior Superintendent of Police Prem Narine over a Facebook post concerning his family.
Narine, head of the Guyana Police Force’s Special Branch, is a key prosecution witness in the extradition proceedings against Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed and his father, Nazar Mohamed. He raised the issue before the court, telling the magistrate that a Facebook post had been brought to his attention during the lunch break.

According to him, the post featured a photograph of himself, President, Dr Irfaan Ali, his wife and his 11-year-old son, accompanied by what he described as a derogatory comment.
He said he believed the post was intended to intimidate him because of his evidence in the proceedings. The senior policeman expressed particular concern that his son’s face was visible in the photograph, stating that the child is a minor who attends a public school.
He said, “I think it’s a tactic to make me afraid or intimidated, which I am somewhat intimidated because my 11-year-old is defenceless in the public. He goes to a public school.”
Narine said the photograph had previously been used on social media with the child’s face blocked, but that the latest post showed the child’s face.
The post was made on Tuesday on the Facebook page “Hana Khamelia,” an account publicly associated with Hana Mohamed, the sister of Azruddin Mohamed and daughter of Nazar Mohamed. A similar post was also shared on a Facebook page bearing the name “Azruddin Mohamed, Leader of the Opposition – Guyana.”
When asked whether he was aware of the post, defence attorney Siand Dhurjon said he was not.
Dhurjon said it would be “regrettable and unfortunate” if a witness’s child or wife were brought into the political fray.
However, he stressed that any determination regarding the legality or liability arising from such a post would have to be addressed through the appropriate legal proceedings.
He told the court that if Narine had an issue with the post, he could “file appropriate proceedings to vindicate himself or his family in a court of law,” but argued that the matter could not properly be ventilated through the extradition proceedings.
The magistrate subsequently addressed the issue, noting that children and spouses should not be drawn into disputes.
She said children and other family members were “innocent people” in the matter and warned that exposing children’s faces on Facebook or other social media platforms could have consequences for them. “These children have schools to go to, have classes to attend,” the magistrate said, before adding: “This is not right to do that.”
She further said such posts could affect children and people’s spouses and should stop.
The issue was then closed, with the magistrate directing the court to return to the afternoon’s proceedings.
THREE-WEEK ADJOURNMENT
Narine began giving evidence on September 3 when the extradition proceedings resumed. Defence attorney Siand Dhurjon completed his cross-examination of Narine on Tuesday, after which Senior Counsel Roysdale Forde began cross-examining the Special Branch head.
Narine will face further cross-examination when the matter resumes on October 21 at 13:30hrs (1:30 p.m), with proceedings scheduled to continue until approximately 16:30hrs (4:30 p.m.) 16:45hrs to (4:45 p.m).
The case will also continue on October 22.
This is not the first time the chief magistrate has raised concerns about social media activity linked to the extradition proceedings and involving Narine. On September 4, Chief Magistrate Latchman warned Hana Mohamed against making Facebook posts concerning matters related to the case. The issue arose during Narine’s testimony after he had told the court that he considered a post from the “Hana Khamelia” account threatening and defamatory.

Narine said he had been the subject of vile posts from the account and expressed concerns for his life and the safety of his family.
Hana was called before the bench and questioned about whether she was responsible for one of the posts, but declined to answer, stating her lawyer had instructed her to remain silent.
Latchman subsequently told her: “Please kindly stop posting. If you are doing it, you need to stop it.” She also urged Hana to advise anyone responsible for the posts to stop.
The chief magistrate has also previously cautioned against social media commentary concerning matters before the court, stressing that the parties should remain focused on the evidence presented during the proceedings.
On March 13, Chief Magistrate Latchman also warned Hana against posting sensitive information from the extradition hearing online.
A month later, on April 16, the Supreme Court of Judicature cleared members of its judicial staff after the Hana Khamelia Facebook account had falsely linked them to the state’s legal team in a social media post concerning the extradition case.
The Supreme Court underscored the need for accuracy when making public statements, particularly those concerning the judiciary, warning that misinformation of this nature could erode public confidence in the justice system. The Supreme Court also noted that the account subsequently corrected the inaccurate statement.
BACKGROUND
The extradition case stems from an October 30, 2025, request by the United States for the surrender of the Mohameds to face an 11-count federal indictment. The indictment includes allegations of wire fraud, mail fraud, money laundering, conspiracy and customs offences.
U.S. prosecutors alleged that the two businessmen participated in a multi-year scheme involving the export of Guyanese gold using falsified customs declarations and reused government export seals, allegedly resulting in the evasion of more than US$50 million in taxes and royalties.

The indictment also concerns a Lamborghini vehicle, with prosecutors alleging that Azruddin caused the vehicle to be shipped from Miami to Guyana and used a false invoice that understated its purchase price, resulting in more than US$1 million in allegedly avoided Guyanese taxes.
The two men were arrested on October 31, 2025, and each was granted $150,000 bail, with conditions requiring them to surrender their passports and report to the Ruimveldt Police Station.
The committal proceedings commenced on January 6, 2026, but have been repeatedly interrupted by legal challenges filed by the defence, most of which have ultimately failed.
The Mohameds were sanctioned by the U.S. Department of the Treasury in 2024 over allegations of corruption and a gold-smuggling scheme and were subsequently indicted by U.S. federal grand jury on related charges. The father and son have denied the allegations.