Fresh filings have been entered in a United States federal court in a case involving records linked to a long-running controversy over allegations concerning Nigerian President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
The development was announced by U.S.-based political advisory and lobbying firm Von Batten-Montague-York, which said its Motion for Leave to File Brief Amicus Curiae and Supplemental Notice of Evidentiary Exhibits had been officially accepted and docketed by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
The filings were submitted in Greenspan v. Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01816-BAH, a case before the federal court in Washington, D.C.
In a statement posted on its verified X account, the firm described the development as a significant step in its effort to place additional materials before the court concerning public statements by Nigerian officials and other individuals connected to Tinubu.
According to the firm, the new submissions contain materials relating to public comments allegedly made by Nigerian government officials and people described as relatives or associates of the President.
The firm also alleged that some public statements concerning the controversy conflicted with positions being taken in the U.S. court proceedings.
“We are happy to announce that our Motion for Leave to File Brief Amicus Curiae and Supplemental Notice of Evidentiary Exhibits have been officially accepted and docketed with the United States District Court for the District of Columbia,” the firm said.
It further argued that the development allows the court to consider the materials as part of the ongoing proceedings, regardless of whether the request to participate as an amicus curiae—a third party seeking to assist the court with relevant information or legal arguments—is ultimately granted.
The firm accused Tinubu and his representatives of attempting to maintain privacy over certain matters in the U.S. proceedings while publicly addressing aspects of the controversy.
“You cannot demand privacy in a U.S. federal court while publicly litigating the same controversy and attacking those advocating for disclosure,” it said.
Von Batten-Montague-York described the docketing of the filings as a victory, but the procedural development does not mean the court has accepted the allegations contained in the submissions as established facts.
Being docketed simply means the filings have been formally entered into the court record. The judge will determine whether the materials are admissible, relevant and entitled to any evidentiary or legal weight as the case proceeds.
The latest development comes amid renewed public attention to U.S. court records and proceedings relating to allegations that have been publicly linked to Tinubu.
Tinubu has previously denied wrongdoing in connection with the allegations.
The case remains pending before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, and no finding of wrongdoing against the President is established by the docketing of the latest filings.