President Dr. Irfaan Ali has strongly criticized a recent ruling by Justice Gino Persaud that prevents the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA) from imposing post-clearance taxes in the luxury vehicle case involving U.S.-indicted businessman Azruddin Mohamed. The President argued that the ruling overlooks decades of established customs practice and undermines the legal foundation of post-importation audits, which he described as essential to protecting state revenues and ensuring accurate tax compliance.
During a live broadcast on Wednesday, Dr. Ali highlighted that the GRA’s authority to perform post-clearance reviews is neither new nor experimental but has been a longstanding part of Guyana’s customs system. He pointed out that such assessments are always vital for verifying declarations after goods arrive in the country. He also mentioned that international regulatory standards support this process, noting that global oversight agencies endorse the ongoing development of post-entry auditing mechanisms.
In support of the GRA’s procedures, the President explained that the agency’s recent efforts to improve compliance monitoring align with modern customs administration models. He argued that Guyana’s decision to enhance capacity in this area aligns with global expectations and best practices for tax enforcement. He stated, “Post clearance, audits and assessments are by no means new. For decades, these mechanisms have been a core part of the customs system. Historically, such functions were carried out by the inspections department of the former Customs and Excise department, now part of the GRA.”
Dr. Ali also suggested that Justice Persaud’s ruling departs from established legal reasoning and has raised serious questions among legal observers and tax officials. In his view, the decision conflicts with the GRA’s statutory role, which has long exercised post-clearance oversight without legal challenge. He indicated that the judgment has caused concern within agencies responsible for safeguarding public revenue, stating that it is “a ruling by Justice Gino Persaud, a ruling that has confounded many observers, and which the Guyana Revenue Authority regards as fundamentally flawed in law,” Dr. Ali said.
In contrast, President Ali praised a separate ruling by the Chancellor of the Judiciary (ag) Justice Yonette Cummings-Edwards—referred to as Justice George in reports—delivered in the case of Zhangzhen Yu. Unlike Justice Persaud’s judgment, the Chancellor’s ruling reaffirmed the legality of post-clearance audits, validating the GRA’s mandate and reinforcing procedural continuity within the customs system. Dr. Ali argued that this ruling restores legal clarity and ensures that the GRA can carry out its duties without undue restrictions.
He emphasized that the government fully supports the Chancellor’s decision and regards it as a necessary correction to Justice Persaud’s ruling. As he stated, “The government welcomes her clear, authoritative, and well-grounded judgment, which re-establishes coherence in customs and allows the GRA to continue fulfilling its mandate without artificial or ill-conceived constraints,” the President said.
According to Dr. Ali, the Chancellor’s interpretation confirms that post-entry verification is not only allowed but also necessary to ensure proper tax collection and safeguard national revenue streams. He mentioned that this affirmation strengthens Guyana’s legal foundation for enforcement, especially in cases involving high-value imports like luxury vehicles. He reiterated that the ruling “reaffirms that post-clearances are not only lawful but essential to protect the public purse.”
The President’s remarks come amid renewed debate over the balance of judicial oversight, tax enforcement authority, and administrative discretion within the GRA. The outcome of these cases is expected to influence future disputes involving tariff assessments, customs valuation, and alleged under-declaration at ports of entry. Dr. Ali’s comments reflect the administration’s intent to defend the integrity of post-clearance tax systems while opposing rulings it believes undermine compliance efforts.
Justice Gino Persaud must approach this matter without any political bias, particularly given the public perception of his alleged anti-PPP stance dating back to 2015. Guyana needs judges who are neutral, fair, and respectful of both the public trust and constitutional institutions. In this case, many allegedly believe the ruling reflects lingering bias against the PPP, reinforcing long-standing concerns about judicial impartiality. As the saying goes, a leopard cannot change its spots, and the judgment has intensified scrutiny over whether past political leanings continue to influence decisions that demand objectivity and legal neutrality.