The first witness in the extradition case against City Billionaires Nazar and Azruddin Mohamed took the stand today, as Principal Magistrate Judy Latchman initiated the committal proceedings.

The witness – Sharon Roopchand-Edwards – is the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

While being led by Special Prosecutor Hobert McKenzie, Roopchand-Edwards told the Court that on October 30, 2025, she received a package containing a bundle of documents and a diplomatic note from the United States of America.

The Court heard that the Diplomatic Note included an extradition request for Nazar and Azruddin Mohamed.

The Permanent Secretary said upon seeing the extradition request, the package with the diplomatic note was handed over to the Minister of Home Affairs, Oneidge Walrond on the same day,

She said she later saw a document containing an Order to Proceed with the signature of that of the Minister of Home Affairs.

But while McKenzie called on Roopchand-Edwards to describe both the Diplomatic Note and the Order to Proceed, Defense Attorney, Siand Dhurjon challenged her authority to do so.

Roopchand-Edwards said she would be in a position to identify the signature on the Order Proceed having worked with the Home Affairs Minister for a period of five years, while in the case of the Diplomatic Note, she would be able to identify it by its number, seal, yellow and blue ribbons, as well as the signature.

But Dhurjon again objected, telling the Court that Roopchand-Edwards did not affix a unique mark on the documents – a position he maintained outside the court room.

“The witness gave away the paper work, never saw it again and comes here in court for the first time to identify it. No unique identifying features,” Dhurjon told reporters.

Against that background, Dhurjon expressed concern about the execution of the committal proceedings.

“All of the evidence against the Mohameds at this stage are strictly papers. We will not be able to question or cross-examine or test the veracity of any of these witnesses, many of whom are aboard, some of which are local, most of whom are anonymous, unknown witnesses. It therefore means that the procedures to admit paper work as evidence have to be strictly complied with, and in this case we would say those procedures were not complied with, and we made those submissions. And, it reached a tempo when I was so frustrated that I had to say that not even in a cuss case, not even in a trivial narcotic case that this would be permissible. Why is it being permitted? Why is the Prosecution asking the Court to permit in this case paper work evidence where the paper work chain of custody is broken,” Dhurjon said. 

While the witness was allowed to provide the court with identifying features for both documents, the Court only admitted the Diplomatic Note into evidence, and not the Order to Proceed.

Magistrate Latchman, in doing so, repeatedly warned Prosecutor McKenzie not to attempt to bring what cannot be brought through the front door, through the back door.

The committal proceedings will continue on Thursday when Roopchand-Edwards is expected to return to the witness box.

According to the Prosecutor, at least two other witnesses are expected to appear before the Court. 

Related posts:

Mohameds extradition hearing gets underway as Magistrate shuts down Defence team’s request for pause Prosecution completes disclosures in Mohameds extradition case; Constitutional issues to be heard and addressed Prosecution and Defence tussle over disclosures in Mohameds extradition hearing; Case resumes on Friday Attorneys for US Government present key documents to Court in Mohameds extradition case