The presidency has described the ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation involving President Bola Tinubu in the United States as a civil dispute over access to government records, stressing that it is not a criminal case.
Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, made the clarification in a statement issued on Thursday amid renewed discussions about the case before the US District Court for the District of Columbia.
Onanuga said no US court had convicted Tinubu or found him guilty of criminal misconduct in connection with the matter.
“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 statement reads.
The case centres on requests for records held by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) relating to investigations connected to a Chicago drug-trafficking case from the early 1990s.
Aaron Greenspan, founder of PlainSite, submitted FOIA requests in 2022 and 2023 to six US government agencies, seeking records concerning the investigations. Tinubu was one of four individuals named in the requests.
Among the documents sought by Greenspan were what he described as the “entire FBI file” on Tinubu and FBI interview records covering 1992 to 1993.
Several agencies initially declined to confirm or deny whether they possessed records relating to Tinubu, invoking the “Glomar” response, which allows agencies in certain circumstances to refuse to acknowledge the existence of records.
However, in April 2025, US District Judge Beryl Howell ruled that the FBI and DEA had failed to sufficiently justify their refusal to confirm or deny the existence of the records.
Howell subsequently directed the agencies to search for and process records responsive to Greenspan’s FOIA requests, provided they were not exempt from disclosure.
READ ALSO:
- Presidency Clarifies Tinubu’s US FOIA Case, Says It Is Not Criminal Proceeding
- Ogogo’s Family Thanks Yayi For Support During Actor’s Illness
- Peter Obi Warns Against Electoral Malpractice Ahead Of 2027 Elections
- Sanwo-Olu Fixes September Deadline For Opebi Link Bridge Opening
- 37 Suspected Oil Thieves Die After Inhaling Petroleum Product In Rivers
The FBI and DEA later released thousands of pages of documents, although parts of the records were redacted. The agencies also submitted a Vaughn index explaining the legal basis for some of the withheld information.
Tinubu joined the litigation as an intervenor and has asked the court to permit the FBI and DEA to retain certain redactions and withholdings.
Greenspan, however, challenged the extent of the disclosure and asked the court to order the agencies to release additional information, arguing that they had not fully complied with Howell’s directive.
In court filings dated August 28, Tinubu argued that some information should remain withheld or redacted because of privacy protections under US law.
His lawyers maintained that FOIA is designed to promote transparency about government activities rather than expose private information gathered by law-enforcement agencies about individuals.
They cited FOIA Exemption 7(C), which protects certain law-enforcement records where disclosure could amount to an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, as well as provisions of the US Privacy Act.
Tinubu’s legal team also argued that Howell’s 2025 ruling against the FBI and DEA’s use of the Glomar response did not remove his privacy protections over the contents of investigative records.
Onanuga said the FBI and DEA had so far released 399 pages, with some sections withheld under exemptions recognised by US law.
He said the exemptions relate to matters such as grand-jury proceedings, attorney-client and attorney-work-product privileges, law-enforcement information, personal privacy, confidential sources and investigative techniques.
“The litigation is a civil records-disclosure dispute under FOIA. It does not constitute a criminal charge, trial, or judicial finding against President Tinubu,” he said.
The presidential aide also cited a February 4, 2003, letter from the US Consulate in Lagos to Tafa Balogun, who was then Inspector-General of Police.
According to Onanuga, the letter stated that an FBI records check had found no criminal arrest records, wants or warrants for Tinubu, who was serving as Lagos State governor at the time.
He further disclosed that Greenspan has until September 11 to file an opposition and response to submissions by the defendants and Tinubu, while the FBI, DEA and the president have until September 18 to respond.
Onanuga also dismissed claims linking former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar and Karl Von Batten to the litigation, insisting that neither is a party to the case.
He urged the media and the public to separate the court proceedings from what he described as partisan commentary, noting that the US court would ultimately determine whether the disputed redactions and withholdings comply with applicable law and the evidence before it.