The Presidency has clarified that the ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case involving records relating to President Bola Tinubu before a United States federal court is a civil dispute over access to government records, not a criminal case against the Nigerian President.
Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, made the clarification in a statement issued on Thursday.
Onanuga said the case before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia arose from FOIA requests submitted in 2022 by Aaron Greenspan, who sought records relating to Tinubu from several US government agencies.
According to the Presidency, the agencies initially withheld some records or declined to confirm or deny whether certain records existed, prompting Greenspan to file Civil Action No. 23-1816 in 2023.
“For clarity, the matter is a civil records-disclosure dispute under the United States Freedom of Information Act. It is not a criminal case against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, nor has the court found him guilty of any criminal wrongdoing.”
The Presidency said Tinubu was later permitted to participate in the proceedings as an intervenor, while several US agencies initially relied on what is known as the Glomar defence.
The defence allows government agencies in certain circumstances to refuse to confirm or deny the existence of records, particularly where doing so could reveal sensitive law-enforcement information.
According to Onanuga, the US District Court subsequently granted summary judgment in favour of the CIA, EOUSA, Department of State, Department of the Treasury and Internal Revenue Service, removing them from the proceedings.
The remaining aspects of the case involve the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
The Presidency said the FBI and DEA have since produced 399 pages of records, although portions of the documents were redacted under exemptions contained in US law.
Greenspan has challenged some of the redactions, while the FBI and DEA, through the US Department of Justice, have defended their decision to withhold portions of the records.
The Presidency said the agencies cited several legal protections, including those covering grand jury proceedings, Pen Register Act information, attorney-client communications, attorney work product, law-enforcement records, personal privacy, confidential sources and investigative techniques.
Onanuga added that Tinubu, acting on legal advice, had also asserted his rights under FOIA Exemption 7(C), which relates to personal privacy in law-enforcement records.
The statement said the plaintiff has until September 11, 2026, to file an opposition and reply to the processes submitted by the defendants and Tinubu, while the FBI, DEA and Tinubu have until September 18 to respond.
The Presidency stressed that the disclosure or withholding of documents under the FOIA process does not establish criminal liability.
“The release or withholding of records under FOIA does not, by itself, establish criminal liability. The case concerns access to government records and the proper application of statutory exemptions.”
The Presidency also disputed claims that Atiku Abubakar or US-based political adviser Karl Von Batten are central to the proceedings.
Onanuga said neither Atiku nor Von Batten is a party to the case and accused recent commentary by Von Batten of inaccurately portraying himself and his client as central figures in the litigation.
The Presidency further noted that the case remains under the control of US District Judge Beryl A. Howell, who will determine whether the FBI and DEA properly applied the exemptions they relied upon when redacting the documents.
It urged Nigerian media organisations and members of the public to distinguish between the actual court proceedings and political commentary surrounding the case.
“The litigation is a civil records-disclosure dispute under FOIA. It does not constitute a criminal charge, trial or judicial finding against President Tinubu.”
The clarification comes amid renewed public attention in Nigeria to the US records concerning Tinubu and the legal battle over which portions of those records should be made public.
How did this story make you feel?
Join the conversation
Share a thoughtful response. Submissions may be reviewed before appearing.
Reader responses are closed on older stories.
