By CANDIA DAMES, Guardian News Editor

The 'defamation' published nationwide relating to the Mona Vie controversy may have had a 'profound effect' upon the minds of Marco City constituents, according to Minister of State for Finance Zhivargo Laing.

"In that regard, it is very important for a public hearing in this matter to be held at the Supreme Court in Freeport where my constituents may have the liberty to attend and to hopefully see justice prevail in the vindication of my good name," Laing said in an affidavit filed this week.

The minister, who is the member of Parliament for Marco City, moved to block a bid by Leader of Opposition Business in the House of Assembly, Dr. Bernard Nottage to have the Mona Vie defamation case transferred from Freeport to Nassau.

Laing has sued Nottage, St. Thomas More MP Frank Smith and former Customs Comptroller John Rolle over comments they made earlier this year in relation to the controversy. Nottage, Smith and the opposition allege that Laing used his position to benefit his sister-in-law, who sells Mona Vie, a Brazilian juice drink.

The controversy centers around the rate that was charged for the drink. Laing has said the rate was changed mid-year when it was reclassified by the customs comptroller, who at the time was Rolle. The minister said he intervened to have the drink placed back into the lower customs duty category.

Rolle made comments on the matter in an interview, but he never specifically referred to any action that was or was not taken by Laing. The minister contends, however, that those comments defamed his good name, as did comments made by Nottage and Smith on the matter.

But before any court hears the substance of the case, a decision will have to be made on where the case is held.

Nottage contends in an affidavit that he and his attorney live in New Providence, as do the attorneys representing the other defendants in the matter. He also said that any likely witnesses in this matter would be residents of Nassau "as the factual matrix which grounds this matter emanates in New Providence."

Nottage said that traveling to Grand Bahama for the trial would "considerably add" to the costs of the overall litigation. He noted that both Laing and his attorney, Fred Smith, have been attending the Marco City Election Court matter in Nassau "and there appears to be no difficulty with either of them attending the hearings in Nassau."

"I am of the opinion that justice will be served if this matter is remitted to the Registry in the City of Nassau as I, and the other defendants, will not be prejudiced in our defense due to the increase in legal fees that may be occasioned if this matter continues to trial in Grand Bahama," Nottage said.

He claimed that his attorney wrote Smith seeking concurrence to move the matter to Nassau, but there was no reply. But Laing responded in an affidavit of his own, saying he was advised by his lawyer that Nottage's affidavit contains material that is in breach of court rules.

He said preliminary objections will be taken at the hearing of the defendants' application as to the admissibility of Nottage's affidavit.

Laing noted that he is a resident of Freeport where he lives with his family in their home.

"I am the member of Parliament for the Marco City Constituency in Grand Bahama. I travel to and spend time in Nassau weekly because I work there," he said, adding that Rolle, the former comptroller, now lives in Exuma.

Laing said he was advised by his attorney that the residency of a particular witness is not a relevant factor which ought to be taken into consideration by the court, on the application before it to relocate the case.

"In addition, as this is a libel action and I am likely to have been most affected by the said defamation in my constituency as aforesaid, I am advised by my counsel and verily believe that I am entitled to seek an order for a jury trial, and that such jury should be constituted by residents of Freeport," he said.

Laing also said that Smith's appearances in Nassau for the Marco City case have absolutely nothing to do with the Mona Vie matter, and the dates for interlocutory applications or trial in the latter matter have nothing to do with the Marco City case.