I am not an expert, but it seems that El Naschie does not appear to dispute any longer that his pattern of self-publication was unusual or that there had been little or no peer review. He is simply claiming that publication was necessary to preempt the theft of his work by rivals and that the absence of peer review was excused by his seniority. Whether that is inconsistent with Nature's comments is, I assume, a matter for the judge to decide.
I am about 85% certain that El Naschie has claimed in the past that his own papers were peer-reviewed. But I can't find that exact claim by him at the moment. He can't claim that in court, because he'd have to name the nonexistent reviewers, so he is dropping back to a position he sees as defensible.
His papers were not even proofread, let alone peer-reviewed.
El Naschie does claim in this Elbeet Beetak interview (watch from 5:00 to the end. You can turn on subtitles in English, German, Italian or Spanish) that his papers weren't mostly published in his own journal, and that he was a "chaired professor" which is baloney.