-by Mike Bhikam, NY

Guyana is at a pivotal moment in its democratic evolution, yet it now faces an uncomfortable paradox: the prospect of an Opposition Leader who is simultaneously under U.S. indictment and subject to an active extradition request. This is not a question of partisan loyalty—it is a matter of institutional integrity.

In early October 2025, U.S. federal prosecutors charged Azruddin Mohamed and his father with a sweeping list of offences, including money laundering, wire fraud, mail fraud, bribery, and tax evasion, tied in part to a goldexport scheme that allegedly evaded more than US$50 million in taxes. Their enterprise had already drawn scrutiny after the U.S. Treasury sanctioned the family in 2023, citing the smuggling of more than 10,000kg of gold into the United States.

When Mohamed was arrested in Georgetown in October 2025 following a formal U.S. extradition request, the arrest occurred just days before he was expected to be elected Opposition Leader. He was later released on bail pending further hearings.

Beyond the courtroom, the stakes are profound. Reports indicate that U.S. prosecutors even filed a restricted unredacted indictment, a move experts interpret as a sign that sensitive or nationalsecurityrelevant evidence may be involved. Analysts warn that if Guyana appears permissive toward individuals wanted for highstakes financial crimes, it risks reputational damage, judicial credibility, and economic stability on the international stage.

The situation also raises questions about governance norms in Guyana. Many democratic systems expect senior officeholders to maintain Freedom of movement, Legal clarity regarding their status, the ability to participate fully in parliamentary duties and public credibility and moral authority.

Given that Mohamed is currently under sanction by the U.S. Treasury Department for alleged largescale gold smuggling and tax evasion—over 10,000kg of gold and US$50 million in taxes—these concerns are amplified.

As noted by U.S. journalist Thomas Anderson, mishandling the Mohamed extradition could give the impression that Guyana accommodates highvalue fugitives.

The role of Opposition Leader is more than ceremonial. It requires assured access to nationalsecurity briefings, participation in constitutional appointments, and the ability to represent Guyana’s democratic checks and balances without constraint. An individual navigating extradition proceedings, travel limits, and serious foreign criminal charges occupies a precarious position in fulfilling these obligations.

This is not about guilt or innocence. Mohamed, like any individual, is entitled to due process and the presumption of innocence. The issue is whether the country’s second-highest constitutional office can be effectively—and credibly—held by someone whose legal standing is uncertain and whose case may test Guyana’s diplomatic relationships.

As Guyana rises in global prominence, particularly in oil and resource diplomacy, the country cannot afford ambiguity about its commitment to transparent governance and the rule of law. Ensuring that key public offices are free from the shadow of international criminal proceedings is not a partisan demand—it is a prerequisite for national stability and global trust.

The post The Risk of Installing an Indicted Fugitive Offender at the Helm of Guyana’s Opposition appeared first on Sheriff News Network - Guyana.

—by Joel Bhagwandin

It is profoundly perplexing to my faculty of reasoning that there exist intellectuals and others who would so brazenly prostitute their supposed credibility in defense of an indicted, OFAC-sanctioned gold smuggler in Guyana, in such an unashamedly profanatory manner, as though the authorities are obliged to absolve the accused of all alleged crimes. Furthermore, a rational mind would find it exceedingly difficult to comprehend how these very so-called intellectuals, under different circumstances—had the alleged offenses been attributed to an agent of the incumbent political party—would have upended the world with vociferous opposition, protests, and cries of corruption and illegality.

Having established this on unapologetic grounds, let us now contextualize the quantifiable magnitude of the financial crime under discussion, not to mention the related and unrelated transgressions.

Ten thousand kilograms of smuggled golequatees to 352,740 ounces. With the average price per ounce of gold between 2015 and 2019 standing at US$1,400, this results in a staggering sum of US$494 million, or GY$105 billion. Consequently, the US$50 million owed in taxes represents a mere 10% of that total. It is important to note that the royalty rate for large-scale mining operations is 8%. However, the calculation of the US$50 million (or GY$10 billion) omits corporate taxes, which are not included in this figure.

To further elucidate: this is no ordinary instance of smuggling. It is vast in its scope. Consider the following:

– Total declared gold exports in 2024 amounted to 434,067 ounces. This means that the volume of gold smuggled by a single entity over five years was equivalent to 81% of the total declared gold exports for the entire country in a single year.

– To offer additional perspective, GY$105 billion could finance two and a half Bharrat Jagdeo Demerara River bridges.

– It could fund ten years of “Because We Care” cash grants for schoolchildren.

– It could cover three years of old age pensions for all pensioners.

– It could construct 10,500 low-income houses—benefiting 10,000 families.

– It could underwrite the cost of an entire year’s fuel consumption for the entire country.

– This sum ($105B) equals approximately 7,291 years of the Opposition Leader’s salary.

This list is by no means exhaustive.

The post 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗴𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗰𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗴𝗼𝗹𝗱 𝘀𝗺𝘂𝗴𝗴𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴: 𝗢𝗻𝗲 𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗺𝗼𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝟴𝟭% 𝗼𝗳 𝗚𝘂𝘆𝗮𝗻𝗮’𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗻𝘂𝗮𝗹 𝗴𝗼𝗹𝗱 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝘀—𝗲𝗻𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱 𝗯𝗿𝗶𝗱𝗴𝗲𝘀, 𝗳𝘂𝗻𝗱 𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺 𝗹𝗶𝘃𝗲𝘀. appeared first on Sheriff News Network - Guyana.

Political Commentary | By Joel Bhagwandin

It would be recalled that since the split of the APNU+AFC coalition, Vice President and General Secretary of the PPP/C, Dr. Bharrat Jagdeo, had predicted that the AFC will, before the national elections, unashamedly crawl right back to the APNU begging to re-consume them into the façade of an APNU+AFC coalition. Yesterday, (June 18, 2025), that prediction manifested quite beautifully, though not surprisingly.

At the outset of the so-called coalition talks between the two parties, AFC had put to the APNU a presumptuous proposal demanding 55% of the seats in the National Assembly, which was outrightly and correctly rejected by the APNU leader, Aubrey Norton.

Subsequently, in a bravado exhibition, the AFC embolden their presumptuousness by declaring that they will contest the elections alone, knowing full well to themselves that their demise at the polls would be guaranteed.

As the AFC’s internal divide and disenchanted members deepened, which played out yesterday with the defections of that party’s youngest members to the APNU, unknowingly to the party apparently, the AFC was forced into a retreat, which saw them “eating their vomit”, by running back to the APNU with a desperately downscaled proposal from demanding 55% of the seats, down to 35%, which was again, rightly and correctly rejected by the APNU in the circumstances.

These developments flied in the face of Nigel Hughes who fallaciously presented himself as an inspirational leader for the youths especially. Yet, under his leadership, he has failed to attract new members to the party. Instead, the inverse occurred.

Brief review of Nigel Hughe’s tenure since re-taking, by way of hijacking, the AFC’s leadership:

On June 29, 2024, Hughes won the AFC leadership at the party’s 8th National Congress. Thereafter, he immediately called for a 10–15-year national development plan. This was a plea made to other political parties whereby a special public request was made by him for the leadership of the PPP/C to engage him on this front. This was despite the AFC’s existence for some two (2) decades, bearing in mind that he previously served as the party’s leader as well. This, in my assessment, was a subtle way of accepting that the AFC lacks the capability to develop an original national development plan, much less public policies.

One year following his election to the party’s helm, he publicly opposed the trend of students sitting 20+ CSEC subjects, calling it impractical and unsustainable. He also criticized the GOAL scholarship program, despite its widespread uptake, arguing it doesn’t suit Guyana’s realities.

It would be recalled, too, that his dishonesty was exposed in connection with his contract with ExxonMobil Guyana (EMGL). When asked about this, he had disclosed, unequivocally should his client’s interest conflict with the country’s, his client’s interest shall prevail. After being brutally criticized for this by the PPP/C General Secretary and this author, he then backpedaled—stating that he was not the attorney representing EMGL, which was quickly disproved when a video surfaced of a Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) hearing in a case involving EMGL, wherein he was in fact the attorney representing EMGL.

Simultaneously, Nigel Hughes was actively working to undermine Aubrey Norton with the hope that he would have been supported to somehow become a “consensus presidential candidate” to lead the APNU/AFC coalition. Aubrey Norton, being the smarter and more seasoned politician than Nigel Hughes, who is a fake sophisticate, survived Hughe’s machinations to have him ousted, thereby crushing Hughes ambition, thus, proving that Hughes is politically inept and daft.

As the national elections near with less than three months remaining, these developments in the political landscape are quite entertaining as they unfold, proving what we knew a long time and predicted, that Nigel Hughes is a fake sophisticate, lacks substance, discreditable, and hugely politically inept.

The post Nigel Hughes proven to be an amateur in politics who was masterfully outplayed by Aubrey Norton appeared first on Sheriff News Network - Guyana.