Presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Atiku Abubakar, has challenged President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to explain records surrounding a $460,000 forfeiture in the United States instead of attacking the lobbyist he hired to represent his interests in Washington.
Atiku’s position was contained in a statement issued on Wednesday by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, in response to comments by Sunday Dare, Special Adviser to the President on Media and Public Communications.
Dare had criticised Atiku for engaging the US lobbying firm Von Batten-Montague-York and cautioned against claims that the firm’s managing partner, Karl Von Batten, had access to US President Donald Trump or his administration or could influence ongoing court proceedings.
But Shaibu said the Presidency was avoiding the substantive issues raised by American judicial records by focusing on the background and activities of Atiku’s lobbyist.
Atiku hired the lobbying firm in March for $1.2 million to protect and strengthen his reputational standing in the United States.
According to a document filed with the US Department of Justice under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, one of the objectives of the engagement was to counterbalance the Nigerian government’s lobbying narratives in the US.
The firm said in July that it had begun providing members of the Trump administration, Congress and senior congressional staff with US Department of Justice records relating to drug trafficking allegations concerning Tinubu.
Shaibu said Atiku’s engagement with the firm was publicly registered with the US Department of Justice and therefore could not be described as a secret attempt to influence Washington.
He challenged Tinubu to explain why his name appeared in historical US federal narcotics and money-laundering records and why a US District Court entered a decree forfeiting $460,000 held in an account in his name.
“These are not documents written by Atiku Abubakar. They were not manufactured by Karl Von Batten. They form part of an American judicial record,” Shaibu said.
He stressed that civil forfeiture was not a criminal conviction but argued that the existence of the court record could not be dismissed through political attacks.
Shaibu also accused the Tinubu administration of hypocrisy over its criticism of Atiku’s $1.2 million lobbying engagement.
He alleged that the administration had entered into an arrangement with DCI Group worth $750,000 monthly, amounting to $4.5 million for the first six months, with provisions that could take the engagement to $9 million.
He said both Tinubu and Atiku were entitled to engage lobbyists and questioned why Atiku’s engagement was being portrayed as desperation.
Shaibu said the debate should instead focus on the hardship facing Nigerians, including rising food and transportation costs, electricity bills, insecurity and declining purchasing power.
He challenged Tinubu to account for his administration’s alleged multimillion-dollar lobbying arrangement before criticising Atiku’s $1.2 million engagement.
“President Tinubu, before counting Atiku’s $1.2 million, account for your own $9 million arrangement. And before attacking the messenger, answer the $460,000 question,” Shaibu said.
The post Presidency should explain Tinubu’s $460,000 forfeiture, not attack my lobbyist – Atiku appeared first on Vanguard News.