Presidency Should Explain Tinubu’s $460,000 Forfeiture, Not Attack My Lobbyist — Atiku

Former Vice President and African Democratic Congress presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar has challenged the Presidency to explain circumstances surrounding President Bola Tinubu’s reported $460,000 forfeiture in the United States rather than attacking a lobbyist he hired.

Atiku’s position was conveyed by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, in response to comments by the Special Adviser to the President on Media and Public Communications, Sunday Dare.

Dare had criticised Atiku’s engagement of Washington-based lobbying firm Von Batten-Montague-York, warning against claims that its managing partner, Karl Von Batten, had direct access to United States President Donald Trump or could influence ongoing court proceedings.

Atiku’s camp described the focus on Von Batten’s personal background as a diversion from substantive questions about records concerning Tinubu.

Atiku said his $1.2 million engagement with the lobbying firm was voluntarily registered with the United States Department of Justice under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.

He argued that the Presidency should instead address records surrounding the reported forfeiture of $460,000 in the United States.

The former vice president also accused the Tinubu administration of hypocrisy over criticism of his lobbying expenditure, alleging that the government had entered into a separate arrangement with DCI Group worth $750,000 monthly.

According to Atiku, the arrangement amounted to $4.5 million over six months and could potentially reach $9 million.

He questioned why his $1.2 million engagement should be portrayed as evidence of desperation while the administration’s alleged arrangement could cost substantially more.

The political dispute comes as Atiku and other opposition figures intensify activities ahead of the 2027 presidential election.

Atiku’s lobbying engagement reportedly seeks to strengthen his reputation in the United States and counter narratives concerning him and the Nigerian government.

The lobbying firm has also been involved in efforts to place United States government records relating to allegations surrounding Tinubu before officials in Washington.

The controversy has increasingly centred on historical United States records involving Tinubu, including the reported civil forfeiture of $460,000 in 1993. Tinubu has not been criminally convicted over the forfeiture, and the matter remains a subject of political and legal debate.

Atiku maintained that attacking the messenger would not resolve questions arising from the documents.

He urged the Presidency to provide explanations about the forfeiture while also accounting for its own alleged lobbying expenditure, saying the records should be addressed directly rather than through personal attacks.