–Embassy says criminal investigation predates political career; US$50M gold fraud indictment and sanctions cited
GEORGETOWN, Guyana — The United States has dismissed suggestions that its criminal case against Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed is politically motivated, maintaining that the investigation into his alleged financial crimes began years before he entered politics.
Responding to questions from the Kiskadee Watch, a pro-Mohameds, tabloid-like website, U.S. Embassy Public Affairs Officer Jarrod Crockett said American prosecutors pursue criminal charges based on evidence, not political considerations.
“The United States does not pursue criminal charges for political reasons. We do it because we have evidence of wrongdoing; enough evidence for a grand jury to return an indictment,” Crockett told the Mohamed-aligned website.
His comments followed a statement from the Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA), which questioned whether Washington was pursuing justice or assisting the Guyana Government in removing its principal political opponent.
However, the criminal investigation and sanctions against Mohamed and his father, Nazar Mohamed, predate the formation of his party and his emergence as Opposition Leader.
In June 2024, the U.S. Treasury Department sanctioned both men, Mohamed’s Enterprise and associated businesses under the Global Magnitsky sanctions programme, citing corruption involving gold exports, tax evasion and bribery of public officials.
The Treasury alleged that Mohamed’s Enterprise failed to declare more than 10,000 kilograms of gold between 2019 and 2023, depriving Guyana of more than US$50 million in taxes and duties.
American authorities also accused the business network of bribing government officials to facilitate illegal gold shipments, falsify customs documentation and secure favourable treatment in government transactions.
The sanctions extended to Hadi’s World and Team Mohamed’s Racing Team. Former senior government official Mae Thomas was also sanctioned over alleged corruption linked to the Mohamed business network.
The case escalated in October 2025 when a federal grand jury in the Southern District of Florida indicted Azruddin Mohamed and his father in connection with an alleged multimillion-dollar gold export fraud and money laundering scheme.
According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the two allegedly used a system involving recycled Guyana Revenue Authority and Guyana Gold Board seals to export gold without paying the required taxes and royalties.
Prosecutors alleged that empty boxes bearing official seals were shipped from Dubai through Miami to Guyana, allowing the seals to be reused on subsequent gold shipments.
The indictment also alleges that Azruddin Mohamed participated in a separate scheme involving a Lamborghini purchased for approximately US$680,000 but declared at a substantially lower value, allegedly depriving Guyana of more than US$1 million in taxes.
American authorities are additionally seeking the forfeiture of approximately US$5.3 million in gold bars seized at Miami International Airport in June 2024.
The allegations remain before the courts, and both men are presumed innocent unless proven guilty.
Against that background, Crockett maintained that the American case concerns alleged criminal conduct involving wire fraud, money laundering and gold smuggling, rather than Mohamed’s political activities.
He explained that the alleged offences involved Miami-based businesses and the American financial system, establishing a basis for prosecution under U.S. law.
The GHRA also questioned the involvement of foreign attorneys in the extradition proceedings, particularly because their legal fees are being paid by the Guyana Government.
Crockett referred to an explanation provided by Attorney General Anil Nandlall in November 2025 that outside attorneys were retained to process the American extradition request under established legal procedures and the bilateral extradition treaty.
He stressed that Washington initiated the request but does not control the proceedings before Guyana’s courts.
“We do not have an expectation or a timeline, because it is not our process to control. When the magistrate decides, we will proceed from there. Until then, we will wait,” Crockett said.
In its statement, the GHRA alleged that Mohamed had been subjected to harassment, questionable arrests and other forms of persecution. It called on international human rights organisations, including the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, to examine the proceedings.
The association also urged local civil society organisations and the Guyana Bar Association to monitor the case.
Crockett, however, emphasised that Mohamed’s separate criminal matters in Guyana should not be confused with the American extradition proceedings.
The U.S. position, as reported by Kiskadee Watch, is that the extradition request stems from a longstanding criminal investigation supported by a federal grand jury indictment, with the final decision resting with Guyana’s judiciary.