标签： Guyana

Guyana’s principal opposition faction, We Invest in Nationhood (WIN), is capitalizing on mounting international pressure from Western powers to secure parliamentary recognition for its leader, Azruddin Mohamed. The political standoff centers on the delayed election of an Opposition Leader, a constitutional requirement that remains unfulfilled more than four months after September’s general elections.

WIN issued a formal statement demanding that Speaker of the National Assembly Manzoor Nadir convene a meeting of the 29 opposition parliamentarians to resolve the leadership impasse. The party asserts that Mohamed, whose coalition secured 109,075 votes, represents the legitimate choice of the electorate and must be permitted to assume his constitutional role.

The diplomatic community has intensified pressure on Guyana’s political institutions, with British and Canadian high commissioners alongside European Union and United States ambassadors collectively urging the appointment of an Opposition Leader as essential to democratic functionality. These interventions occurred within a critical 72-hour window preceding WIN’s statement.

Complicating the political calculus are serious legal challenges facing Mohamed and his father, Nazar “Shell” Mohamed, both subjects of United States extradition proceedings related to alleged mail fraud, wire fraud, and money laundering charges. A committal hearing is currently underway in a magistrates court.

WIN alleges that the ruling People’s Progressive Party (PPP) intentionally obstructs the opposition leadership process, fearing Mohamed’s potential to introduce rigorous legislative scrutiny and his perceived resistance to political influence. The party contends that Guyana’s democracy suffers from unprecedented parliamentary inactivity, with only one assembly session convened since the elections.

President Irfaan Ali has dismissed allegations of governmental interference as “absolutely ridiculous,” maintaining that the selection of opposition leadership remains exclusively the concern of opposition parliamentarians. His comments, delivered during a public engagement in Ogle, East Coast Demerara, emphasized administrative non-involvement in the opposition’s internal decisions.

President Irfaan Ali of Guyana has emphatically dismissed any possibility of yielding to potential United States pressure to negotiate a territorial settlement with Venezuela regarding the long-standing border controversy. Speaking to journalists during the inauguration of the AC Marriott Hotel in Ogle, East Coast Demerara, President Ali underscored that national security and territorial integrity remain non-negotiable priorities for his administration.

‘The safety and security of the Guyanese people, along with the integrity of our borders and sovereignty, will never be compromised,’ President Ali asserted, addressing speculation about potential US diplomatic intervention. While no formal request has been made by Washington, international relations analysts suggest the Trump administration might seek to broker an agreement ensuring unimpeded access to oil-rich zones in the Essequibo region, both onshore and offshore.

The United States has consistently recognized Guyana’s existing borders across both Democratic and Republican administrations. Despite Guyana’s confidence in its case before the International Court of Justice regarding the validity of the 1899 Arbitral Tribunal Award, experts anticipate continued Venezuelan claims over the 160,000-square-kilometer Essequibo Region and its adjacent oil-abundant Atlantic waters.

President Ali’s statements follow recent US actions in Venezuela that included the capture and extradition of President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores to face charges related to narcotics, terrorism, and weapons violations. US President Donald Trump has declared that his administration would temporarily ‘run’ Venezuela, utilizing the nation’s oil revenues for its benefit.

Addressing regional security concerns, President Ali highlighted significant shifts in the Caribbean’s democratic and security landscape, emphasizing the importance of stability in combating international criminal networks. He warned against complacency, noting that Guyana remains vulnerable to global networks influenced by events in other regions.

The Guyanese leader also pointed to notable security improvements, citing a 25.5% reduction in serious crimes in 2025—the lowest in a decade—attributed to enhanced technology and community partnerships in law enforcement. ‘We are partnering with technology, innovation, and communities because investments depend heavily on a stable and secure environment,’ President Ali concluded.

Guyanese President Irfaan Ali maintained a firm stance of silence on Friday regarding two sensitive diplomatic matters involving the United States, deflecting mounting pressure from political opponents demanding governmental transparency. The President declined to elaborate beyond an official statement issued days earlier concerning ongoing negotiations with the US about potentially relocating third-country nationals to Guyana.

When pressed by journalists in Rosignol, West Coast Berbice, about whether an agreement had been reached to accept US deportees rejected by their native countries, President Ali simply referenced the January 5th statement from Foreign Secretary Robert Persaud. “You’ve heard a statement out of the Foreign Secretary. There is nothing to add to that statement at this time,” the President asserted.

The previously released communique indicated that Guyana and the US were engaged in “productive discussions on a framework of understanding” aligned with Guyana’s national priorities while simultaneously supporting American objectives.

This diplomatic reticence sparked sharp criticism from opposition leaders. Aubrey Norton, leader of the People’s National Congress Reform and A Partnership for National Unity (APNU), condemned the potential acceptance of non-Guyanese deportees as “unacceptable,” arguing that welcoming individuals deemed undesirable by another society would prove detrimental to Guyana.

Norton, a political scientist and former foreign service officer, employed a striking environmental analogy, comparing the potential migrant transfer to dumping toxic materials across international borders. “APNU cannot understand the logic behind accepting deportees that another society does not want,” he stated, demanding immediate cessation of these “insane” negotiations that he believes contradict national interests.

Simultaneously, President Ali similarly avoided commentary on another contentious issue: the United States’ removal of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro to face trial in New York on drug and weapons charges. Norton criticized this action as a violation of international law, emphasizing that all international proceedings should occur within established legal frameworks.

While refusing to address the Maduro situation directly, President Ali had previously expressed his position on social media platform X on January 3rd, stating that “stability, respect for law, and democratic transition are critical to the future of Venezuela and the broader Americas.”

The developments occur against a backdrop of strengthened security and military cooperation between Guyana and the United States, with Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago remaining key US allies in the region. Opposition groups including the We Invest in Nationhood and the Forward Guyana Movement have called for parliamentary scrutiny of these diplomatic engagements, advocating for greater transparency in international agreements.

In a significant development within Guyana’s judicial landscape, Attorney General Anil Nandlall has publicly commended Acting Chancellor Roxane George-Wiltshire’s contributions to the justice system while vehemently rejecting allegations of government conspiracy against former judiciary member Justice Yonnette Cummings.

The statements emerged during a ceremonial event at the United Nations complex in Georgetown, where substantial IT equipment and software valued at US$400,000 were transferred to multiple law enforcement and judicial agencies. This technological enhancement initiative falls under the Partnership of the Caribbean and the European Union (PACE) Justice Project, representing a major investment in modernizing Guyana’s legal infrastructure.

Nandlall characterized Chancellor George-Wiltshire as possessing “extremely high ideals” and praised her dedicated work ethic, describing her as “a special asset” to the nation’s judicial framework. The ceremony highlighted the government’s commitment to strengthening judicial capabilities through technological advancement.

Following the event, journalists pressed the Attorney General regarding circulating media reports suggesting possible government involvement in Justice Cummings’ departure from the judiciary. Nandlall dismissed these allegations as “ridiculous” during an impromptu exchange, asserting that Justice Cummings remained “a qualified, very respected jurist” who would not submit to such conduct.

The controversy stems from recent correspondence by Former Chief Magistrate Kalam Juman Yassin, who speculated about a potential coordinated effort against Justice Cummings-Edwards. This occurred amidst a backdrop of public criticism from government officials, including Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo and former Local Government Minister Nigel Dharamlall, regarding the Guyana Court of Appeal’s decisions in several politically sensitive cases.

The judicial landscape has undergone notable transitions since late October 2025, when President Irfaan Ali announced Justice Cummings’ move into pre-retirement status, subsequently maintaining Navindra Singh as Acting Chief Justice and George-Wiltshire as Acting Chancellor.

Notably, the Caribbean Court of Justice has upheld the majority of Chancellor George-Wiltshire’s judicial decisions during her tenure as Chief Justice, even after several were previously overturned by the Guyana Court of Appeal, underscoring her judicial competence and the complex dynamics within Guyana’s legal system.

Guyana’s Attorney General Anil Nandlall announced on Thursday a sweeping modernization initiative for the nation’s justice system, with particular focus on establishing a formal regulatory framework for jury operations—a system currently operating without statutory foundation.

Speaking at a ceremony marking the delivery of US$400,000 in information technology equipment to key justice institutions, Nandlall revealed ongoing discussions with Chancellor of the Judiciary Roxane George-Wiltshire to develop comprehensive jury regulations. “The Chancellor and I are discussing some type of framework to regulate juries and the way juries function,” Nandlall stated, acknowledging that Guyana currently operates without the formal jury systems common in other jurisdictions.

The technology transfer, facilitated through the Partnership of the Caribbean and the European Union (PACE) Justice Project, will bolster the capabilities of multiple agencies including the judiciary, Director of Public Prosecutions’ Chambers, Guyana Police Force, and forensic services. Chancellor George-Wiltshire confirmed that eight additional Liberty court recording systems would join recently acquired equipment, bringing the total to 18 courtrooms equipped with modern recording technology. “These systems will definitely enhance court efficiency. A modern judiciary requires clear and reliable systems to ensure a secure official record of court proceedings,” she emphasized.

Nandlall identified critical gaps in Guyana’s current jury system, noting the absence of standardized procedures for juror oaths, protection mechanisms, exemption protocols, transportation expenses, and overnight sequestration arrangements. He further highlighted that dozens of new companies and agencies remain excluded from the jury pool, necessitating comprehensive reform.

Beyond jury reform, the Attorney General outlined additional legislative modernization efforts, including plans to replace the 1893 Evidence Act inherited from British colonial rule—legislation he described as “clearly out of sync with modern realities.” Additional initiatives include legislation enabling judge-alone trials, completion of an Alternative Sentencing Bill, and review of the Summary Jurisdiction Offences Act to eliminate outdated provisions. “We don’t necessarily have to wait for the judiciary to strike them down as unconstitutional or as outmoded. We can aggressively and proactively do that,” Nandlall asserted, indicating planned tabling of relevant legislation in the National Assembly.

Guyana’s political landscape erupted in controversy as two major opposition parties vehemently condemned the government’s clandestine negotiations with the Trump administration regarding the settlement of third-country nationals from the United States.

The We Invest in Nationhood (WIN) and Forward Guyana Movement (FGM) issued separate statements on Wednesday, January 7, 2026, castigating President Irfaan Ali’s administration for engaging in talks about accepting deportees or refugees without parliamentary oversight or national consultation. Both parties characterized the negotiations as a fundamental breach of democratic principles and national sovereignty.

FGM denounced the potential agreement as a ‘direct affront to the sovereignty of the Guyanese people,’ particularly given the absence of a functioning Parliament to provide legislative scrutiny. The party emphasized that any policy substantially altering Guyana’s demographic composition or imposing new social responsibilities must undergo rigorous parliamentary debate and national consultation.

Foreign Secretary Robert Persaud confirmed on January 5 that ‘productive discussions’ were underway with the US to establish a ‘framework of understanding’ consistent with Guyana’s national priorities while supporting US objectives. This initiative forms part of the Trump administration’s broader strategy to relocate unwanted migrants, with several Caribbean nations including Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, and Belize having already signed similar agreements.

The opposition parties raised multifaceted concerns spanning security, economic, and social dimensions. FGM challenged the government to disclose the agreement’s contents publicly, subject it to parliamentary debate, and conduct comprehensive security and economic impact assessments. Critical questions emerged regarding the verification systems for migrant backgrounds, administrative oversight mechanisms, and the potential strain on Guyana’s already stretched infrastructure.

WIN explicitly rejected supporting any agreement until the government provides full disclosure, ensures parliamentary oversight, and presents a clear plan prioritizing Guyanese citizens’ well-being. The party highlighted the existing pressure from over 100,000 Venezuelan migrants on hospitals, schools, housing, and essential services, questioning how additional influxes would be managed.

Both opposition groups demanded transparency regarding financial contributions from the US, long-term integration plans, housing arrangements, and the potential diversion of resources from Guyanese citizens already facing challenges in accessing land and affordable homes. The parties insisted that any demographic transformation affecting the nation’s future stability and security must not be decided through secretive negotiations without clear disclosure to the Guyanese people.