Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar is using Atiku US lobbyists to push his political message in Washington, while the $1.2 million deal fuels a fresh fight with President Bola Tinubu’s camp.
ABUJA, NIGERIA — Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar’s decision to engage a United States-based lobbying firm has opened a fresh political battle over Nigeria’s 2027 election, with the firm now drawing attention to records and allegations involving President Bola Ahmed Tinubu in the US.
According to documents filed under the United States Foreign Agents Registration Act, Atiku engaged Von Batten-Montague-York, L.C., in a 12-month agreement worth $1.2 million. The contract covers lobbying, government affairs, strategic advice, reputation management and efforts to present Atiku’s policy positions to US policymakers.
Newstridez’s team reviews show that the arrangement goes beyond ordinary public relations. The contract allows the firm to facilitate meetings between Atiku and US government officials, including members of Congress, while also providing advice on policy positioning and engagement strategy. The filing makes the financial arrangement public, although it does not by itself prove that every subsequent claim made by the firm reflects Atiku’s personal position.
The latest controversy centres on Von Batten-Montague-York’s campaign concerning allegations and historical records involving Tinubu in the United States. The firm has publicised documents and pursued access to records linked to an old US forfeiture case, turning what was once largely a Nigerian political argument into an issue receiving attention in Washington.
The Presidency has strongly criticised the arrangement. Special Adviser to the President on Media and Public Communications, Sunday Dare, described the lobbying effort as politically motivated and argued that Atiku’s camp was seeking foreign validation ahead of the 2027 presidential contest. Dare’s comments have added another layer to an already heated exchange between the ruling camp and the opposition.
Atiku’s camp, however, has pushed back against the criticism. A representative of the former vice president argued that the central issue should not be the identity of the lobbyist but the US records being discussed. The camp also stressed that the $1.2 million engagement was registered with the US Justice Department, making the nature of the arrangement publicly available under FARA.
The dispute has also produced competing claims over whether the lobbying represents a legitimate attempt to bring information before US policymakers or simply another weapon in Nigeria’s increasingly internationalised 2027 political contest. Both sides have sought to frame the issue around transparency, accountability and political motives.
Von Batten-Montague-York has meanwhile remained active in the controversy. In September, the firm alleged that its founder, Karl Von Batten, received an unsolicited offer of $3 million and an invitation to a confidential meeting in London to stop the campaign concerning allegations against Tinubu. The firm said it rejected the offer and intended to submit the communications to US authorities.
That allegation has not been independently established by Newstridez. The Presidency has questioned the credibility of the firm, while the firm has maintained that its campaign is based on issues it believes deserve official scrutiny. The competing claims show why the underlying court records and official documents remain more important than political accusations exchanged on social media.
The controversy has also revived questions about the role of foreign lobbying in Nigerian politics. Lobbying itself is legal in the United States when properly disclosed, and FARA requires certain foreign agents to register their activities and financial arrangements. A fact-check by The Guardian found that public US records confirm Von Batten-Montague-York’s FARA registration and its $1.2 million agreement with Atiku.
For Nigerians, the issue matters because the dispute is unfolding ahead of the 2027 presidential election. Atiku is associated with the African Democratic Congress coalition, while Tinubu is expected to seek another term under the All Progressives Congress. Their political camps are already engaged in competing efforts to shape public opinion inside Nigeria and abroad.
The financial size of Atiku’s contract has also become a talking point. At $1.2 million, the agreement represents a major private political expenditure, particularly in a country where campaign financing and the influence of wealthy individuals remain subjects of public debate.
The Presidency has also faced questions over its own use of US lobbying services. Reports earlier this year said the Federal Government spent millions of dollars on lobbying and public affairs efforts in Washington. That comparison has become part of the political response from Atiku’s supporters, who argue that criticism of his $1.2 million contract should also consider the government’s own foreign lobbying activities.
However, the two issues require separate scrutiny. Spending by a private political figure and expenditure by the Federal Government involve different sources of funds, responsibilities and accountability requirements. The existence of government lobbying therefore does not automatically answer questions about Atiku’s spending, just as Atiku’s contract does not establish wrongdoing by the government.
The campaign has now moved beyond the question of how much Atiku paid. The more consequential issue is what the lobbyists can actually achieve in Washington. Their ability to influence US policymakers will depend on the credibility of the evidence presented, the legal status of the records involved and whether US institutions consider the material relevant to their own processes.
Newstridez also notes that allegations surrounding Tinubu’s past in the United States should not be presented as proof of criminal guilt. Publicly discussed court records and forfeiture proceedings can raise legitimate questions, but they do not automatically amount to a criminal conviction. The distinction remains important as political actors attempt to use the records during the 2027 campaign.
Former Aviation Minister Femi Fani-Kayode has separately attacked Von Batten and accused the firm of spreading what he described as false information about Tinubu. He also questioned the lobbyist’s identity and background while arguing that the American legal process should be allowed to run its course.
Meanwhile, the lobbying firm has continued to make public statements about the Tinubu records and related US proceedings. Its activities have ensured that an issue which began as a domestic Nigerian political controversy now has an international dimension, with US lawmakers, officials and legal institutions potentially becoming part of the wider debate.
The development also places Atiku under greater scrutiny. By spending heavily on a Washington-based lobbying operation, the former vice president has effectively chosen to fight part of his political battle on foreign ground. That strategy may strengthen his access to policymakers, but it also exposes him to questions about the cost, purpose and results of the engagement.
As at the time of filing this report, the $1.2 million contract remained publicly documented under US foreign-agent registration rules, while the political dispute over the records involving Tinubu continued. The allegations made by the lobbying firm and its opponents remained contested, with no basis to treat disputed claims as established facts.
The next phase is likely to depend on the US legal and disclosure processes, as well as how both political camps use the controversy during the 2027 election campaign. For Atiku US lobbyists, the test is now whether the documents and arguments they are presenting can produce meaningful action in Washington, while Nigerians will continue to watch whether the foreign lobbying battle produces facts or simply adds another layer to the country’s political contest.
