Recent days have seen a surge of social media commentary and political attacks over land sales and supposed conflicts of interest in Nevis. A widely shared post on Facebook accused the government of corruption, suggested that private individuals were unjustly profiting from transactions, and even dragged unrelated figures into the controversy. The allegations so far seem to be baseless, misleading, and politically motivated.
Allegations Without Evidence
The allegations that land transactions at Saddle Hill were linked to questionable commissions and conflicts of interest involving the Premier’s wife are completely false. So far there is no evidence to suggest that she acted as a realtor in any transaction or personally collected hundreds of thousands in commission fees, as one opposition spokesman has alleged.
Furthermore, the political attempt to connect outside supporters of free-market reforms, such as St Kitts and Nevis Citizen Roger Ver, to land schemes in Nevis is completely false. The facts are clear: Ver is not the architect of any Nevis SEZ and has carried out no real estate deals with the Premier’s wife.
Opposition Distraction Tactics
At the same time, Premier Mark Brantley has highlighted the glaring hypocrisy of the opposition. In a public statement, he called on Dr. Janice Daniel-Hodge, leader of the NRP, to answer serious questions about her own role in the sale of 25 acres of land on the south coast.
Brantley pointed out that Daniel-Hodge is co-Executor and co-Trustee of the estate involved in the sale and directly challenged her to clarify:
- Whether she signed the sale documents herself.
- How many millions were made from the deal.
- Whether she personally benefitted as a beneficiary of the sale.
Brantley reminded the public that Daniel-Hodge herself pledged to resign if it was proven that she benefitted from such land sales—a promise now in question.
He also addressed the wider controversy, stating:
“Recent days have seen a surge of social media commentary and political attacks over land sales and supposed conflicts of interest in Nevis. These accusations have even dragged unrelated figures into the debate. So far, the claims appear to be baseless, misleading, and politically motivated.”
Imported Attacks, Local Politics
The broader pattern is clear. Opposition figures are using rumor, speculation and falsehoods as distractions while their own leadership faces unresolved questions about private land transactions.
By dragging in names like Roger Ver into this debate demonstrates the desperate tactics to mislead as Mr Ver is not the promoter of any proposed development in Nevis. Mr Ver has been busy fighting a wider U.S.-driven campaign against him.
These falsehoods not only distort the truth but also distract from real issues Nevisians deserve clarity on.
Conclusion
The people of Nevis should see these opposition
efforts for what they are: a politically charged attempt to smear reputations without facts. Meanwhile, the opposition’s own leadership must answer tough questions about their direct role in land sales.
Nevis deserves an honest debate grounded in facts, not rumor-mongering and false attacks against unrelated parties.
