NEWS
U.S Advocacy Firm Files $57m Lawsuit Against Tinubu, Fani-Kayode, Nigerian Government Over Alleged Defamation, Kidnap Plot
A United States-based advocacy firm, Von Batten-Montague-York, has instituted a $57 million lawsuit against Nigerian President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the Federal Government of Nigeria, former Aviation Minister Femi Fani-Kayode and DCI Group over allegations bordering on defamation and an alleged conspiracy to kidnap and physically harm the firm’s founder, Dr. Von Batten.
The firm disclosed the development in a statement issued on Monday, revealing that the lawsuit was filed on September 28, 2026, before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
According to the advocacy firm, the legal action seeks financial damages against the defendants over allegations it says are connected to efforts to defame its founder and allegedly interfere with his advocacy activities in the United States.
The statement reads:
“Announcement: On Monday, September 28, we filed suit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia against Ambassador Femi Fani-Kayode, Nigerian President Bola Tinubu (@officialABAT), the Federal Government of Nigeria, and DCI Group for defamation and an alleged conspiracy to kidnap and physically harm Dr. Von Batten.
“The lawsuit seeks $36 million jointly against President Bola Tinubu and the Federal Government of Nigeria, $3 million against Ambassador Fani-Kayode individually, and $18 million against DCI Group. We kept the lawsuit quiet while service was being effected on the foreign parties in accordance with the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.
“The claims against both President #Tinubu and the Federal Government of Nigeria will face legal hurdles because of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, but this firm does not run from difficult cases, especially when we allege that a conspiracy was undertaken to defame Dr. Von Batten, kidnap him, and physically harm him in an effort to silence his @WhiteHouse and Congressional advocacy concerning @FBI and @DEAHQ records relating to President Tinubu and allegations of heroin trafficking.“
The suit, as described by the firm, places the alleged conduct within the context of Dr. Von Batten’s advocacy activities in Washington, particularly his efforts relating to records held by United States federal agencies.
At the centre of the allegations are claims concerning advocacy before the White House and members of the United States Congress, as well as efforts involving records associated with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Drug Enforcement Administration.
The firm alleges that these advocacy activities became a motivating factor behind what it characterises as an alleged conspiracy to defame, kidnap and physically harm its founder.
However, the claims contained in the lawsuit remain allegations and would be subject to judicial scrutiny and the defendants’ responses in court. The filing of a lawsuit does not, in itself, establish the truth of the allegations against any of the named defendants.
The firm also acknowledged the potential legal complications associated with bringing claims against a foreign sovereign and its officials in a United States court, specifically referencing the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.
Despite the anticipated legal hurdles, Von Batten-Montague-York said it was prepared to pursue the case, stressing its willingness to take on what it described as difficult litigation.
With $36 million being sought jointly from President Tinubu and the Federal Government, $3 million from Fani-Kayode individually and $18 million from DCI Group, the lawsuit has potentially significant financial and political implications if the claims proceed beyond preliminary legal challenges.
The case could also attract considerable attention because it brings allegations involving Nigeria’s political leadership into a United States federal court and links the dispute to wider questions concerning access to government records, international advocacy and allegations relating to President Tinubu.
As proceedings develop, the court will determine whether the claims can overcome the jurisdictional and sovereign-immunity issues raised by the defendants and whether the substantive allegations can ultimately be established.