A United States-based policy advisory and lobbying firm, Von Batten-Montague-York, has said there will be no cover-up over records relating to allegations of drug trafficking involving President Bola Tinubu.
The firm made the declaration as the legal battle over the release of records held by United States law enforcement agencies enters another stage.
In a statement posted on X on Tuesday, the firm said the administration of US President Donald Trump would not shield anyone from scrutiny over the allegations.
Von Batten-Montague-York accused the administration of former US President Joe Biden of resisting efforts to make public records connected to allegations against Tinubu.
It said the US Department of Justice under Biden had fought the release of Freedom of Information Act records concerning the Nigerian president.
The firm, however, said the approach had changed under Trump.
“Unlike President Joe Biden’s DOJ, which fought the release of FOIA records concerning drug-trafficking allegations involving Nigerian President Bola Tinubu, the DOJ under President Donald Trump will never protect an alleged drug trafficker linked to the smuggling of heroin from Nigeria through Illinois to Indiana,” the firm said.
It also thanked Trump, US Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro, members of the Trump administration and lawmakers in Congress for what it described as their willingness to pursue the release of the records.
The firm alleged that the previous administration had focused on Trump while records concerning the allegations against Tinubu remained the subject of a prolonged legal dispute.
According to the firm, the records should be released rather than kept from the public.
The latest statement comes shortly after a federal court granted Pirro only four additional days to comply with an order concerning the release of the records.
Politics Nigeria earlier reported that Pirro had asked the court for a longer period to comply with the directive requiring the release of documents held by the US Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation and Drug Enforcement Administration.
The US Attorney had reportedly requested an additional 10 days.
However, US District Judge Beryl Howell granted only four days, with August 21 set as the new deadline for compliance.
The judge’s decision is important because the dispute has already lasted for several years.
The case arose from Freedom of Information Act requests filed by American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan.
He sought access to records relating to US investigations involving Tinubu and another Nigerian, Abiodun Agbele.
The requests covered several US agencies, including the FBI and DEA.
The agencies had previously relied on so-called “Glomar” responses. Such responses allow an agency to refuse to confirm or deny whether records exist in certain circumstances.
Judge Howell later rejected the broad use of that position in relation to the records being sought.
In April 2025, the judge directed the FBI and DEA to search for and process non-exempt records responsive to the FOIA requests.
The court also ordered the agencies to move away from blanket refusals to confirm or deny the existence of the records.
The legal dispute has continued despite the earlier ruling.
Records being sought are connected to a 1990s investigation in the United States involving suspected narcotics trafficking.
The case has drawn attention to a 1993 civil forfeiture proceeding involving about $460,000 linked to accounts associated with Tinubu.
US court records have previously shown that the money was forfeited to the US government. Tinubu has denied wrongdoing and has consistently rejected allegations that he was involved in drug trafficking.
The distinction between a civil forfeiture case and a criminal conviction has also featured prominently in the political debate in Nigeria.
The issue was raised during the legal challenge to the outcome of the 2023 presidential election.
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi had argued before the Presidential Election Petition Court that the US forfeiture proceedings raised questions about Tinubu’s eligibility to contest the election.
The election tribunal, however, rejected the argument.
The court held that the forfeiture proceeding was civil in nature and that the petitioners had not established that Tinubu had been convicted of a criminal offence in the United States. The Supreme Court subsequently upheld the outcome of the presidential election.
The controversy has nevertheless remained politically sensitive.
The matter has received renewed attention following the engagement of Von Batten-Montague-York by Atiku.
The Washington-based firm was retained by Atiku under a government affairs and strategic advisory agreement. It has since increased its campaign for greater disclosure of US records relating to the Tinubu matter.
In July, the firm said it had begun sharing more than 60 pages of DOJ documents and related court materials with officials in the Trump administration, members of Congress and congressional staff.
The documents reportedly include federal court filings, affidavits and materials relating to the 1993 forfeiture case and the subsequent FOIA litigation.
The firm has argued that US officials and lawmakers should have access to the complete history of the case.
It has also linked the disclosure campaign to broader issues concerning transparency and US-Nigeria relations.
