Tinubu and Atiku: Why the Jefferson case exposes the fallacy of treating civil forfeiture as a criminal conviction, By Kayode Oladele
If allegations examined during an investigation involving Atiku cannot be converted into a criminal conviction against Atiku, an in rem civil forfeiture proceeding cannot logically be converted into a criminal conviction against Tinubu. In each case, the responsible legal inquiry must be the same: Was the individual criminally charged? Was he prosecuted? Was he tried? […] The post Tinubu and…
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has called upon President Bola Ahmed Tinubu's administration to tackle questions about his alleged $460,000 forfeiture in the United States, rather than targeting US-based lobbyist Karl Von Batten-Montague-York. Atiku's statement, released by his media team, highlighted a recent exchange of words between Tinubu's team and Karl Von Batten, who owns the lobbying firm Batten-Montague-York.
In response to the accusations, Atiku emphasized that attacking Von Batten's character and personality would not provide answers to the questions surrounding Tinubu's $460,000 forfeiture. He saw this focus on Von Batten and his $1.2 million lobbying agreement as a diversionary tactic by the Tinubu administration. Atiku warned that despite all the abuse, mockery, and scrutiny of his associates, the $460,000 forfeiture record would remain intact.
He reiterated that documents do not respond to insults and urged Tinubu's administration to address the $460,000 question before considering any other matters.
Written by urgent.news from Daily Post Nigeria's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
This story
This is one outlet's version. Read the fullest account.
