Presidency Clarifies US FOIA Case
….Says No Criminal Charge Against Tinubu
The Presidency has clarified that the ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia is a civil records-disclosure dispute and not a criminal case against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
In a statement issued by the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, on Thursday, the Presidency said reports portraying the matter as a criminal proceeding or evidence of wrongdoing by Tinubu were misleading.
According to the statement, the case originated from FOIA requests submitted in 2022 by Aaron Greenspan to several US government agencies for records relating to Tinubu.
After some agencies withheld records or declined to confirm or deny their existence, Greenspan instituted Civil Action No. 23-1816 before the US District Court for the District of Columbia in 2023.
The court subsequently allowed President Tinubu to participate in the proceedings as an intervenor.
The Presidency explained that some US agencies invoked the “Glomar defence,” a legal position that allows government agencies, in certain circumstances, to neither confirm nor deny the existence of investigative records.
It said the court subsequently granted summary judgment in favour of the CIA, the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, the Department of State, the Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service, removing them from the proceedings.
The statement added that the remaining aspects of the case involve the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
According to the Presidency, the FBI and DEA have produced 399 pages of records, although portions were redacted pursuant to exemptions under US law.
The plaintiff has challenged the redactions and sought access to the unredacted documents.
The FBI and DEA, through the US Department of Justice, have opposed the request, citing protections covering grand jury proceedings, attorney-client communications, law enforcement materials, personal privacy, confidential sources and investigative techniques.
The Presidency also disclosed that Tinubu, acting on the advice of his lawyers, had asserted his rights under FOIA Exemption 7(C), which relates to personal privacy in law enforcement records.
It noted that the plaintiff has until September 11, 2026, to file an opposition and reply to the defendants’ and intervenor’s processes, while the FBI, DEA and the President, as intervenor, have until September 18, 2026, to respond.
The Presidency stressed that the release or withholding of records under FOIA does not, by itself, establish criminal liability.
“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 statement said.
Onanuga also dismissed recent commentary by Karl von Batten, saying neither von Batten nor his client, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, is a party to the case.
He said the outcome of the litigation rests with Judge Beryl A. Howell of the US District Court for the District of Columbia and would be determined by the evidence, applicable law and arguments presented by the parties.
The Presidency therefore urged Nigerian media organisations and the public to distinguish between verified court proceedings and what it described as partisan or speculative commentary.
