High Court Set to Rule on Mohamed's Bail Application Amid Legal Challenges

According to Kaieteur News, the High Court is slated to make a decision regarding Mohamed's bail application on November 23rd. This follows comments made by defense attorneys Roysdale Forde, SC, and Siand Dhurjon, regarding the conditions in prison and extended judicial delays, which were made after Mohamed's appearance before Magistrate Abigail Gibbs at the Sparendaam Magistrate’s Court on Friday, October 30, 2026. Mohamed, who is 39 years old and resides in Houston, Greater Georgetown, was charged under Cybercrime Act No. 16 of 2018 with the unauthorized distribution of electronic data. This charge stems from allegations that he downloaded and shared CCTV footage from the state’s safe city surveillance network that depicted a shooting incident involving the head of Special Branch, Prem Narine. After Magistrate Gibbs denied bail and remanded Mohamed until November 24, the defense initiated a fixed date application in the high court through Mohamed’s mother, Bonita Mohamed, to seek a judicial review of the magistrate’s decision.

Addressing reporters outside the courtroom following proceedings before Justice Priscilla Chandra-Haniff on Wednesday, the attorney general stated that the supporting affidavit is a fundamentally flawed document that fails under basic legal scrutiny. Nandlall informed reporters that he had described the affidavit to the judge as one of the worst he had ever read, characterizing it as a legal deformity that violates nearly every known rule concerning affidavits. Nandlall contended that approximately 140 out of 146 total paragraphs in the affidavit constitute inadmissible hearsay provided by Mohamed’s mother, who reportedly has no direct knowledge of the alleged prison conditions or the events surrounding his arrest. Nandlall asserted that the defense chose political theater over proper procedure by refusing to withdraw and re-file, noting that such an action would imply the filing of something irregular and legally defective.

Nandlall also dismissed public assertions about Mohamed's treatment at Lusignan Prison, stating that official prison logs confirm regular family visits, scheduled meals, and complete access to legal counsel. He added that the state provided photographic evidence to the court demonstrating the facility complies with international human rights guidelines, including the United Nations Nelson Mandela Rules.

Senior Counsel Roysdale Forde offered a different perspective to the media, expressing gratitude for the judge's strict handling of the case while maintaining that Mohamed is being held under oppressive detention. Forde stated that the defense would have argued that he is being held in solitary confinement and under inhumane and oppressive circumstances, referencing the court's statement that he should not be held in circumstances that are psychologically damaging or intended to break his will. Regarding the state’s objections to the affidavit, Forde characterized the AG’s strike-out motion as a delay tactic, explaining that the defense agreed under the Civil Procedure Rules to submit a supplementary affidavit executed directly by Mohamed later that afternoon to advance the matter. Forde also called upon prison authorities to allow public inspection of the facility concerning claims of continuous lighting in Mohamed’s cell, emphasizing that while it is a prison, there must be a minimum standard that has been fallen below in relation to Mohamed.

Defense Attorney Siand Dhurjon expanded on the critique of the state’s methods, questioning why the chief legal advisor to the government employed technical maneuvers instead of addressing the core merits of bail for what he described as a non-serious offense under statute. Dhurjon remarked that the guardian of the constitution should not focus on technical points. He stated that the AG has succeeded in extending the matter for another couple of weeks, congratulating the AG on keeping the opposition leader in custody, and affirmed that the defense will continue efforts to vindicate his client's freedom and innocence.

Justice Chandra-Haniff adjourned the matter to November 12 for oral arguments concerning the state’s application to strike out the affidavit. The court is anticipated to issue its ruling on the affidavit on November 13, with oral arguments for the substantive bail application set for November 23. Mohamed remains in custody pending his next scheduled appearance at the Sparendaam Magistrate’s Court on November 24.