Presidency attacks Atiku over alleged $1.2m Washington lobbying deal
Dare alleged that Atiku’s political camp had contracted a Washington-based lobbying firm, Von Batten-Montague-York, L.C., under a $1.2 million, 12-month retainer.
The Presidency has launched a blistering attack on former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, accusing his political camp of resorting to foreign lobbyists and what it described as “manufactured crises” in an attempt to undermine President Bola Tinubu ahead of the 2027 presidential election.
The Presidency’s latest salvo followed reports and claims emanating from Washington concerning historical United States legal and intelligence records allegedly connected to Nigeria and President Tinubu.
In a strongly worded statement, Special Adviser to the President on Media and Public Communications, Dr Sunday Dare, dismissed the claims as politically motivated and challenged those behind them to produce documentary evidence to substantiate their allegations.
Dare alleged that Atiku’s political camp had contracted a Washington-based lobbying firm, Von Batten-Montague-York, L.C., under a $1.2 million, 12-month retainer.
According to the Presidency, the lobbying arrangement was designed to “counterbalance” the Nigerian government’s narratives and exploit historical US legal records for political purposes ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The Presidency argued that the Washington-based campaign should not be mistaken for an official position of the United States government.
Dare particularly took aim at Dr Karl-Marx Edward Okeke-Von Batten, whom he described as a commercial lobbyist rather than an official of the US government.
He said reports attributed to the lobbyist should be treated as the views of an individual associated with interests linked to Atiku and not as statements emanating from the administration of US President Donald Trump.
“Dr. Karl Von Batten’s comments represent solely the position of an individual associated with Atiku-linked political interests, not the U.S. government or President Trump,” the statement said.
The Presidency also demanded evidence for what it described as allegations of a “highly classified intelligence report” allegedly concerning Nigeria.
It challenged the proponents of the claims to identify their sources, produce the alleged intelligence document and provide tangible evidence of any purported exchange involving Nigeria’s secrets or resources.
According to Dare, the absence of a named Western official, intelligence document or documentary evidence undermines the credibility of the claims.
He described the reports as “political speculation packaged as classified information.”
Presidency Questions Washington Campaign
The Presidency’s response also sought to draw a distinction between lobbying activities in Washington and official actions by the US government.
Dare said publicly verifiable US Department of Justice filings showed that Atiku had contracted the Washington firm on the reported $1.2 million retainer.
He questioned the purpose of spending such a large sum on an overseas political campaign, arguing that the opposition should instead be concentrating on policies capable of winning the confidence of Nigerian voters.
The Presidency accused the opposition of lacking a coherent domestic political and economic alternative to the Tinubu administration.
It argued that the 2027 contest would ultimately be determined by Nigerians and not by reports generated from Washington.
The administration maintained that Nigerians would judge political parties and presidential candidates on economic policies, infrastructure, security, employment, social welfare and other tangible indicators of governance.
Tinubu’s Leave Also Dragged into Controversy
The Presidency also rejected attempts to connect President Tinubu’s current European trip with ongoing legal proceedings in the United States.
Dare said Tinubu was on a previously scheduled annual leave and insisted that there was no connection between the President’s European movements and the US Freedom of Information Act proceedings.
He accused the opposition of attempting to create a political narrative around the President’s movements by linking unrelated developments.
According to the Presidency, the US proceedings are governed by American law and should be allowed to run their course without partisan interference.
Dare cited comments by Senior Advocate of Nigeria Wole Afolabi on Channels Television concerning FOIA requests for historical records held by US federal agencies.
He said Afolabi had explained that the withholding of portions of the records was consistent with US legal provisions protecting confidential investigative processes rather than evidence of an attempt to shield Tinubu.
Presidency Defends Tinubu’s Reforms
The Presidency further used the controversy to defend the economic and institutional reforms of the Tinubu administration.
Dare argued that rather than focusing on historical US records, opposition politicians should present Nigerians with alternative solutions to the country’s economic challenges.
He specifically criticised what he described as the opposition’s “hypocritical” position on major reforms, including the removal of the petrol subsidy.
The statement accused the opposition of abandoning substantive policy debate in favour of what it called “muckraking, emotional manipulation, and ethnic polarization.”
The Presidency said the administration remained focused on fiscal reforms, infrastructure and institutional security reforms, arguing that these areas would ultimately provide the basis for assessing Tinubu’s performance.
Dare maintained that the 2027 election would be won or lost on the strength of domestic performance and political programmes rather than foreign media campaigns.
“True democratic validation is earned through the ballot box and tangible service delivery to the citizens at home,” the statement declared.
Atiku-Tinubu Battle Intensifies
The latest exchange adds another layer to the increasingly fierce political contest ahead of the 2027 presidential election.
Atiku, a former Vice President and one of Nigeria’s most prominent opposition politicians, has continued to position himself as a major challenger to Tinubu.
The Presidency, on its part, has increasingly responded to criticism of the administration by portraying the opposition as lacking a credible alternative policy platform.
The Washington lobbying controversy therefore goes beyond the allegations contained in the reports. It has become another battleground in the wider struggle over the political narrative ahead of 2027.
For the Presidency, the issue is an attempt by the opposition to secure external validation and manufacture damaging headlines against the administration.
For the opposition, however, questions surrounding historical US records and the circumstances surrounding them remain matters that should be subjected to transparency and public scrutiny.
The competing narratives are likely to remain politically potent as the 2027 election approaches.
Dare ended his statement by arguing that political legitimacy cannot be outsourced to foreign consultants.
He said Nigerians would ultimately decide who governs the country through the ballot box, insisting that leadership should be based on domestic accountability, economic planning and tangible development rather than what he described as “paid propaganda.”
The Presidency therefore presented the Washington controversy as a test of the opposition’s strategy, accusing Atiku’s camp of attempting to use foreign platforms to influence a political contest that will ultimately be decided by Nigerian voters.
