•Atiku, Tinubu and Trump
A Washington-based lobbying firm engaged by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar says it has begun sharing documents relating to a long-running United States forfeiture case involving President Bola Ahmed Tinubu with officials of the Donald Trump administration, members of Congress and congressional staff.
The firm, Von Batten-Montague-York, L.C., disclosed that it was providing records from the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) concerning allegations linked to a 1993 civil forfeiture proceeding involving funds connected to Tinubu, reports Vanguard.
The lobbying company was contracted by Atiku, the African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate, in March under a 12-month agreement reportedly valued at $1.2 million. The engagement includes advocacy, diplomatic outreach and efforts to present Atiku’s perspectives on issues relating to Nigeria-US relations.
In a post on X, the firm said it had held discussions with officials within the US government and congressional offices before sharing more than 60 pages of DOJ documents and related court materials.
The firm said some officials were previously unaware of the historical case and that the materials were being provided to ensure that relevant records were available for review.
“Following discussions with members of the Trump administration, Congress and senior congressional staff, we began providing more than 60 pages of Department of Justice documents concerning the DOJ’s allegations relating to Nigerian President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s alleged involvement in a heroin trafficking investigation spanning the late 1980s and early 1990s,” the firm stated.
The documents circulated by the firm include a background chronology titled: “Background and Chronology of the 1993 U.S. Department of Justice Heroin-Proceeds Forfeiture Case and the 2023 FOIA Litigation Concerning Alleged Heroin Trafficking from Nigeria to the United States Involving Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the current President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”
According to the chronology, the DOJ’s 1993 civil forfeiture action arose from an investigation into a suspected drug trafficking organisation operating between Nigeria and the United States.
The records referenced a case filed at the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, identified as United States v. Funds in Account No. 263226700 et al., involving funds that the government alleged were proceeds of narcotics trafficking or connected to money laundering activities.
The documents identified Tinubu, Adegboyega Mueez Akande and Abiodun Agbele as individuals named in the government’s allegations.
The chronology stated that US investigators examined activities between 1988 and 1991 and alleged that proceeds from a drug trafficking network were deposited into bank accounts in the United States associated with Tinubu.
It further stated that the DOJ alleged that Tinubu controlled multiple accounts and that some funds in those accounts were linked to proceeds of illegal activities.
The document also referenced Akande as an associate of Tinubu whom the DOJ alleged was connected to the organisation under investigation, while Agbele was described as an associate whom Tinubu said he knew through Akande.
The DOJ later filed a civil forfeiture action in 1993 seeking the seizure of funds identified in the case. According to the chronology, the matter was resolved through a civil settlement, with a portion of the funds forfeited to the United States government.
The documents also highlighted subsequent legal efforts to obtain records connected to the historical investigation.
It stated that journalist Aaron Greenspan filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit in 2023 seeking documents from several US federal agencies, including records relating to the investigation.
According to the chronology, a US District Court in Washington, DC, in 2025 ruled that some agencies could not rely on a blanket refusal to confirm or deny the existence of records and directed them to process parts of the FOIA request in line with legal requirements.
The firm said the FOIA litigation remains ongoing and that the documents were being shared with congressional committees for “informational and oversight purposes,” citing Nigeria’s strategic relationship with the United States.
The issue of the 1993 forfeiture case was also raised during legal challenges to the outcome of Nigeria’s 2023 presidential election.
Atiku Abubakar and former Labour Party presidential candidate Peter Obi had argued before the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) that Tinubu’s involvement in the forfeiture proceedings affected his eligibility to contest the election.
However, the PEPC dismissed the argument, holding that the petitioners did not establish that Tinubu had been convicted of any criminal offence in the United States.
The court also ruled that the forfeiture proceeding was civil in nature and that the evidence presented did not prove that Tinubu provided false information to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) by not disclosing the matter.
