Mr Farmer, who is also secretary of a new political party contesting the election, Canberra Community Voters, is spearheading the clubs' campaign against poker machines in the casino.

In a letter from lawyers Gilbert and Tobin, Aquis accused Mr Farmer of making false, inflammatory and defamatory statements about the casio, in alleging that the ACT government was prone to making "secret backroom deals".

Mr Farmer's statement was an accusation against Chief Minister Andrew Barr and referred to the Manuka Oval bid as well, with Mr Farmer calling on Mr Barr to make the Manuka and casino bids public.

But the casino's lawyers said Mr Farmer, as an agent of the Raiders who took him on as a lobbyist to fight the casino bid, continued to make statements that breached misleading and deceptive conduct rules in Australian consumer law.

"Aquis requires that Mr Farmer and the Raiders Club ensures that the defective statements cease and all materials containing defective statements are withdrawn and removed from all relevant fora, and you confirm by 12pm on Wednesday 20 July 2016 that such steps have been undertaken," Gilbert and Tobin partner Nirangjan Nagarajah wrote.

"If Mr Farmer and Raiders Club does not do so, we are instructed to commence legal proceedings against Mr Farmer, Raiders Club, Mr Hawkins and other directors of Raiders Club for damages and injunctive relief."

Aquis was also taking its complaints to the ACCC and the ACT Office of Fair Trading.

Raiders chief executive Simon Hawkins said no material had been removed as demanded. The Raiders had not taken legal advice and were not concerned, he said.

"To my knowledge we haven't put anything up that is false, so I'm quite comfortable with what we've done," he said.

Mr Farmer said it was "not the fault of Aquis", but the ACT government's process for taking unsolicited bids was secretive and should be drastically reformed.

"I'm disappointed that our majority foreign-owned casino is using legal bluff and bluster to try and further limit public debate on an important matter. It might work in Beijing but surely not in Canberra," he said, apparently a reference to Aquis chairman Tony Fung being from Hong Kong.

In its letter to Clubs ACT chief executive Gwyn Rees, Aquis accused the group of falsely calming that allowing poker machines in the casino would threaten thousands of jobs in clubs. Placards displayed in clubs suggested 2300 jobs were at risk, a claim that was "highly emotive" but without foundation, Aquis said.

Clubs ACT was also ignoring the tough business conditions already facing clubs, with some clubs unsustainable and their employees already at risk of losing their jobs. The casino expansion would provide more job opportunities, and a chance for clubs to sell poker machines to the casino, giving them a much needed cash injection to keep some of them afloat, Aquis said.

It also accused the clubs of making misleading statements about the loss of revenue to foreign owners, and the risk of more problem gambling. To the extent that problem gambling existed in Canberra it was at least in part due to the failure of the clubs to tackle the issue, the casino said.

Its letter also claims that clubs in Canberra had already approached the casino to sell their machines.

Mr Rees also dismissed the threat.

"We won't be taking down material," he said. "Shutting down public debate may work where the foreign owners and their management teams come from, but we will not be silenced from speaking to our members in response to a government that has turned their backs on community clubs ...

"For longer than many would understand, Canberra clubs have been forced to operate within a constantly changing and increasingly precarious legislative environment ...the casino is simply the final straw."

Separately, Mr Rees has been seeking access to ACT government documents relating to Aquis' application for a casino licence. He was told by licensing director Josh Rynehart this month that the request involved so many documents that he would have to pay between $55,000 and $65,000 for the government to process the request.

Aquis did not say whether it had launched legal proceedings after the failure of any of the parties to remove material by its deadline.