Tinubu FOIA Case: Presidency Clarifies It’s Civil, Not Criminal
The Presidency has moved to clear the air on the ongoing legal proceedings involving President Bola Tinubu in the United States, stressing that the case is a civil records-disclosure dispute and not a criminal matter.
In a statement on Thursday, Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, said recent reports had created a misleading impression that Tinubu was facing criminal proceedings in the US.
“It is not a criminal case against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, nor has the court found him guilty of any criminal wrongdoing,” Onanuga said.
What the Case Is Really About
The case, before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, concerns Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests filed by one Aaron Greenspan in 2022 for records relating to Tinubu held by various US government agencies.
Greenspan, whom the Presidency described as someone known to work with Nigerian opposition figures including David Hundeyin and Atiku Abubakar, filed a lawsuit in 2023 after some agencies withheld certain records.
The court later allowed Tinubu to participate as an intervenor.
FBI and DEA Produce Documents
Onanuga explained that the CIA, Executive Office for United States Attorneys, Department of State, Treasury, and IRS were all removed from the proceedings after summary judgment was granted in their favour.
This left only claims involving the FBI and DEA for further consideration.
The two agencies later produced 399 pages of records, although portions were redacted under exemptions provided by US law.
Greenspan has since challenged the redactions.
Why the Redactions?
The Presidency listed several grounds cited by the FBI and DEA for retaining redactions:
-
Grand Jury proceedings – protected from public disclosure
-
Pen Register Act – protects information relating to court orders for surveillance devices
-
Attorney-work product and attorney-client privileges – where agents sought legal advice
-
Law enforcement purposes – documents prepared for investigations
-
Personal privacy – information that could lead to unwarranted invasion
-
Confidential sources and law enforcement techniques – to protect investigative methods
Tinubu, on the advice of his lawyers, has also asserted his rights under FOIA Exemption 7(C).
What Happens Next
The litigation remains under the control of Judge Beryl A. Howell.
Key dates:
-
September 11, 2026 – Plaintiff’s deadline to file opposition and reply
-
September 18, 2026 – FBI, DEA, and Tinubu’s deadline to respond
“The release or withholding of records under FOIA does not, by itself, establish criminal liability,” the Presidency said. “The case concerns access to government records and the proper application of statutory exemptions.”
Political Commentary vs Court Proceedings
The Presidency also rejected commentary by Karl von Batten, saying he and his client, Atiku Abubakar, are not parties to the case.
“Neither is a party to the case,” Onanuga said. “The outcome will be determined by Judge Howell on the basis of evidence, applicable law, and arguments presented by the parties – not on the wishful preference of Alhaji Atiku Abubakar or his agent.”
The Presidency urged Nigerians to distinguish between verified court proceedings and political commentary.
Comments
This post currently has no comments.