A legal controversy many Nigerians thought had been settled has suddenly found its way back into the corridors of power in Washington.
More than three decades after a United States civil forfeiture case involving President Bola Tinubu, a Washington-based lobbying firm has reopened the conversation—not in a courtroom, but in the offices of senior officials in the Donald Trump administration and the US Congress.
The move has once again thrust one of the most debated episodes in Tinubu’s political history into the international spotlight, just as discussions continue over Nigeria’s diplomatic engagement with the United States.
Lobbying Firm Begins Circulating DOJ Records
The lobbying company, Von Batten-Montague-York L.C., announced that it has begun distributing more than 60 pages of US Department of Justice (DOJ) records relating to the decades-old case to senior officials within the Trump administration, members of Congress and congressional aides.
According to the firm, the objective is to draw attention to allegations contained in historical court filings connected to a US investigation conducted between the late 1980s and early 1990s.
In a statement posted on its verified 𝕏 account, the company claimed that several officials in Washington had not previously been familiar with the documents.
“Following discussions with members of the Donald Trump Administration, Congress and senior congressional staff, we began providing more than 60 pages of Department of Justice documents concerning the DOJ’s allegations involving Nigerian President Bola Ahmed Tinubu,” the firm stated.
It added that the documents include court filings, sworn affidavits and judicial decisions connected to the matter.
How The Lobbying Campaign Began
The renewed campaign follows a lobbying agreement signed in March 2026 between the firm and interests linked to former Vice President Atiku Abubakar.
Under the reported $1.2 million, 12-month contract, the company was engaged to provide strategic advisory services, lobby officials within the executive and legislative branches of the US government, and counter narratives promoted by the Nigerian government.
As part of those efforts, the firm said it is now ensuring that the historical records are placed before influential policymakers in Washington.
The Case That Refuses To Disappear
At the centre of the renewed attention is a 1993 civil forfeiture case filed by the US Department of Justice before the District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
According to documents circulated by the lobbying firm, US investigators examined the activities of a heroin distribution network that allegedly operated in Chicago between 1988 and 1991.
Federal authorities alleged that proceeds linked to the organisation were deposited into bank accounts owned or controlled by Tinubu.
The filings also mentioned Adegboyega Mueez Akande and Abiodun Agbele in connection with funds the US government sought to seize.
Investigators described Akande as an alleged leader of the organisation and someone they believed had a longstanding relationship with Tinubu.
Agbele, according to the documents, was arrested after allegedly selling heroin to an undercover law enforcement officer and later cooperated with investigators.
The US government subsequently sought the forfeiture of funds it alleged were connected to drug trafficking and money laundering.
Civil Case, Not Criminal Conviction
The proceedings eventually ended in a negotiated settlement under which $460,000 was forfeited to the United States government.
However, the matter remained a civil forfeiture action against funds and did not result in Tinubu being criminally charged or convicted.
Throughout the years, Tinubu has consistently denied any involvement in criminal wrongdoing.
The court filings relied on information gathered by several federal agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), to establish what investigators described as probable cause linking certain bank accounts to unlawful financial transactions.
FOIA Lawsuit Added Fresh Twist
The lobbying firm’s latest document also highlighted the ongoing efforts of American journalist Aaron Greenspan, who has spent years seeking additional records relating to the investigation.
Greenspan filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit in 2023 against several US agencies requesting access to more government records connected to the case.
In 2025, a US judge ruled that the FBI and DEA could not continue relying entirely on a blanket refusal to confirm or deny the existence of certain documents because the historical investigation had already been officially acknowledged.
The court consequently ordered the agencies to process relevant portions of the request in line with FOIA provisions.
According to the lobbying firm, that litigation remains ongoing.
Documents Sent To US Lawmakers
Von Batten-Montague-York said the chronology of events, together with court decisions and supporting documents, is now being distributed to selected committees in both the US House of Representatives and the Senate.
The firm described the exercise as being for “informational and oversight purposes,” linking it to Nigeria’s strategic relationship with the United States and reports that President Tinubu is seeking a meeting with President Trump during the forthcoming United Nations General Assembly.
Did You Miss? ‘We’re Not Finished’: Trump Warns Iran As US Eyes Secret Nuclear Site For Possible Massive Strike
As of the time of filing this report, the Presidency had not publicly responded to the lobbying firm’s latest claims.
Issue Previously Tested In Court
The decades-old forfeiture case also featured prominently during the legal battle that followed Nigeria’s 2023 presidential election.
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and Labour Party presidential candidate Peter Obi argued before the Presidential Election Petition Court that the forfeiture should have disqualified Tinubu from contesting the election.
The tribunal, however, dismissed the argument.
It held that the petitioners failed to establish that Tinubu had ever been convicted of a criminal offence in the United States.
The court further ruled that the forfeiture proceedings were civil in nature and did not prove that Tinubu submitted false information to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) regarding his eligibility to contest the presidential election.
With the lobbying campaign now shifting the issue back into Washington’s political circles, a controversy many believed had been consigned to history is once again attracting international attention.