A United States-based lobbying firm hired by African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar has announced that it has begun distributing historical United States Department of Justice (DOJ) records relating to President Bola Tinubu to officials in the administration of President Donald Trump, members of Congress and senior congressional staff.
The Washington-based firm, Von Batten-Montague-York, L.C., disclosed the development in a statement posted on its X (formerly Twitter) account, stating that the documents relate to historical allegations investigated by U.S. authorities involving Tinubu in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
According to the firm, it was engaged by Atiku in March 2026 under a 12-month lobbying contract worth $1.2 million to enhance his profile in Washington, facilitate engagement with U.S. policymakers and counter what it described as the Nigerian government’s lobbying efforts.
The firm said many U.S. government officials were previously unfamiliar with the historical court records and had now been provided with more than 60 pages of DOJ documents, court filings, affidavits and related federal court decisions. It added that the documents would also be shared with relevant congressional committees for informational and oversight purposes.
Among the materials circulated is a document 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.
According to the chronology, the DOJ alleged that a Nigeria-based heroin trafficking organisation imported heroin into the United States and distributed it through associates operating in Chicago.
The document references United States v. Funds in Account No. 263226700 et al., No. 93 C 4483, identifying Bola Tinubu, Adegboyega Mueez Akande and Abiodun Agbele among individuals named in the government’s civil forfeiture proceedings.
It states that federal investigators examined the activities of the alleged trafficking organisation between 1988 and 1991 and alleged that proceeds from the operation were deposited into U.S. bank accounts owned or controlled by Tinubu.
The chronology also identifies Akande as the alleged leader of the organisation and describes Agbele as an associate who later cooperated with U.S. investigators after his arrest.
According to the document, the Department of Justice filed civil forfeiture proceedings in 1993, seeking the forfeiture of funds it alleged were linked to narcotics trafficking or money laundering. The matter was later resolved through a negotiated civil settlement, under which part of the funds was forfeited to the U.S. government.
The lobbying firm also highlighted the ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation filed in 2023 by journalist Aaron Greenspan, who sought the release of records relating to the historical investigation.
It noted that a U.S. District Court ruled in 2025 that agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), must process certain requested records after finding they could not rely on blanket refusals to confirm or deny their existence. The firm said the FOIA case remains before the courts.
Von Batten-Montague-York said the records are being shared with members of both the executive and legislative branches of the U.S. government as Nigeria remains a strategic U.S. partner and amid reports that President Tinubu is seeking a bilateral meeting with President Trump during the forthcoming United Nations General Assembly.
The issues surrounding Tinubu’s 1993 U.S. civil forfeiture case were extensively litigated after Nigeria’s 2023 presidential election.
Former presidential candidates Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi had argued before the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) that Tinubu should have been disqualified because of the civil forfeiture proceedings.
However, the PEPC dismissed the claims, ruling that the petitioners failed to prove Tinubu had been convicted of any criminal offence in the United States. The court also held that the forfeiture proceedings were civil, not criminal, and found that the evidence presented did not establish that Tinubu submitted false information to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) regarding the matter.