The Tribune

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

Peter Nygard’s claims that two court actions challenging his construction activities are part of a wider conspiracy against him have been blasted as “rantings” that “defy all logic”.

Attorneys acting for the Save the Bays environmental advocacy group slammed as “fiction” the Canadian fashion mogul’s claims that its two Judicial Review actions were mere ‘delaying tactics’ to prevent Nygard Cay’s reconstruction until the Opposition Free National Movement (FNM) was re-elected.

Orin Snyder, an attorney for the Gibson Dunn law firm, implied that Mr Nygard’s claims - contained in an October 20 letter to the southern New York district court - were designed to influence Bahamian public opinion in his favour.

Tribune Business revealed earlier this week that how Mr Nygard and his US attorneys were claiming that two Judicial Review actions, challenging construction activity at his Lyford Cay home, were part of a wider conspiracy involving the FNM.

They claimed that “the real purpose” of the actions was to prevent Mr Nygard rebuilding his home until the FNM, purportedly supported by his neighbour and arch rival, Louis Bacon, was returned to power in the Bahamas.

And once the FNM was elected, Mr Nygard claimed Mr Bacon will be able to “use his influence” to shut down efforts to rebuild Nygard Cay permanently.

Dismissing Mr Nygard’s conspiracy claims, Mr Snyder replied: “Without a shred of evidence, Nygard also proclaims that petitioners [Save the Bays and Mr Bacon] seek to delay the Judicial Review actions for imagined political reasons.

“The claim is a fiction, contradicted by the evidence, and defies all logic.”

Mr Bacon, and the Save the Bays/Coalition to Protect Clifton environmental activist group, want to obtain access to video footage possessed by a former Nygard employee turned ‘whistleblower’, Stephen Feralio, via subpoenas they are seeking from the New York courts.

They believe it could provide evidence for seven cases currently before the Supreme Court, including five defamation actions by Mr Bacon, and the two Judicial Review proceedings launched by Save the Bays/the Coalition over construction/development work at Nygard Cay.

Mr Nygard and his companies, though, are arguing that it should be the Bahamian Supreme Court - not the New York courts - who decide on whether Feralio and his evidence are admissible in the seven actions.

Mr Snyder said Save the Bays had “never sought to delay adjudication of the Bahamian actions”, instead producing evidence to purportedly show that the Bahamian government - not his clients, nor their New York court action - was responsible for the delay.

“Nygard’s other inflammatory statements about Mr Bacon’s supposed political influence and motives are unsubstantiated, outrageous and intended for a different audience,” Mr Snyder told the New York district court.

“They read like the rantings one might find on a partisan blog, rather than a letter to this honourable court.

“In any event, the next scheduled election in the Bahamas is 30 months away (May 2017) and is irrelevant. Petitioners will continue to aggressively prosecute the Bahamian lawsuits long before that time.”

Mr Snyder’s comments were backed up by Save the Bays’ local legal director, Fred Smith QC, who described Mr Nygard’s conspiracy claim as “utter fiction” designed to conceal his ties to the governing Progressive Liberal Party (PLP).

“This irresponsible conspiracy theory is nothing more than a pathetic smokescreen, a silly fiction concocted in an attempt to stop the truth from getting out. Quite frankly, it smacks of desperation,” Mr Smith said in a statement. “The truth will out.

“Clearly, they will try anything to stop Feralio’s footage from seeing the light of day, as they fear it may not only reveal the true extent of Nygard’s questionable dealings with the PLP, but also may prove what we’ve been saying all along – that the construction work at Nygard Cay was undertaken unlawfully.”

Mr Smith suggested the ‘conspiracy claim’ involving Mr Bacon, Save the Bays and the FNM was also designed to “keep the lid” on the contents of the video footage possessed by Feralio.

The QC also supported Mr Snyder’s allegations that it was the Government, and Mr Nygard’s legal team, who were responsible for delaying progress in the two Judicial Review actions before the Supreme Court.

He argued that one action had been delayed for 18 months by attacks on the presiding judge by a member of Mr Nygard’s legal team, while the Government had now filed ‘strike out applications’ on the second action - which is challenging the veracity of the consultation process it launched over construction permit applications for Nygard Cay.

“The time sensitivity of Judicial Reviews is a point that our side has stressed from the very beginning,” Mr Smith said. “For a member of Nygard’s legal team to suddenly show concern over delays therefore smacks of hypocrisy.”

And he added: “It is utter nonsense that Save the Bays’ court case is part of some far-fetched plot to benefit Mr Bacon – an utterly laughable suggestion backed by no evidence whatsoever, and a clear example of the truism that paper will stay still and let you write anything on it.”

Mr Smith also suggested that it was “telling” that Mr Nygard’s US attorneys were urging the New York courts to narrow the scope of video disclosures “to specifically exclude conversations and dealings involving government officials”.

Their letter described as “irrelevant” any information sought on “payments, donations, gifts, presents, favours, monies, assistance and other consideration to current or former public officials or employees or their relatives”.

Mr Smith added: “On the contrary, we consider any such evidence to be of the utmost relevance, as we believe Mr Nygard has been allowed to blatantly flout the rules and regulations of this country to his own benefit and the detriment of the public interest....”

Save the Bays’ New York attorney, Mr Snyder, also alleged that Mr Nygard was seeking to “hijack” the video discovery process by urging Feralio to re-focus on material relating to the Save the Bays actions.

This, he added, was being done to “suppress damaging evidence” related to an alleged ‘smear campaign’ against Mr Bacon.

A spokesperson for Mr Nygard last night declined to comment on Mr Snyder’s letter or Mr Smith’s comments.