Alleged Drug Case: US Court Accepts Lobbying Firm’s Fresh Evidence
By ESTHER McWILLIS-IKHIDE
A United States federal court has accepted and docketed fresh submissions by the political advisory and lobbying firm Von Batten-Montague-York in an ongoing case involving allegations linked to President Bola Tinubu.
The firm announced the development on Tuesday through its verified X account. It said the US District Court for the District of Columbia formally accepted its Motion for Leave to File Brief Amicus Curiae and Supplemental Notice of Evidentiary Exhibits.
According to the firm, both submissions now form part of the court record in Greenspan v. Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01816-BAH.
Von Batten-Montague-York said the court can now consider the materials regardless of whether Mr Tinubu objects to their inclusion.
The firm described the development as a major victory. It said its submissions seek to draw the court’s attention to public comments by Nigerian government officials and people described as relatives of the president concerning the underlying controversy.
It also alleged that some of those public statements mischaracterised facts relating to the case.
The firm further argued that the Nigerian Presidency and senior officials have publicly discussed the controversy while the president has simultaneously sought privacy protection before the US court.
However, the acceptance of the submissions does not mean that the court has accepted the allegations contained in them as proven facts. The court must still consider the materials and determine what weight, if any, they deserve.
Von Batten-Montague-York said it was satisfied that the documents had entered the federal docket. It maintained that the development gives the court access to evidence concerning public statements surrounding the controversy.
The firm also criticised President Tinubu and his advisers for opposing disclosure while, in its view, continuing to address the matter publicly.
The latest development therefore adds another layer to the legal dispute. It also places the competing arguments over privacy, public statements and disclosure before the US federal court for consideration.
