*President Bola Tinubu.
The Presidency has clarified that the ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case involving President Bola Tinubu before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia is a civil records-disclosure dispute and not a criminal case against the Nigerian president.
In a statement issued on Thursday by the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, the Presidency said the court had neither charged nor found Tinubu guilty of any criminal wrongdoing.
The clarification followed what the Presidency described as “speculative reports” surrounding the litigation, which originated from FOIA requests submitted in 2022 by Aaron Greenspan to several United States government agencies seeking records relating to President Tinubu.
According to the statement, after some US agencies withheld records or declined to confirm or deny their existence, Greenspan commenced Civil Action No. 23-1816 before the US District Court for the District of Columbia in 2023.
The court subsequently allowed Tinubu to participate in the proceedings as an intervenor.
The Presidency explained that several US agencies invoked the “Glomar defence”, a legal position that permits government agencies to neither confirm nor deny the existence of particular records where doing so could compromise law enforcement interests, personnel, sources or investigative techniques.
It said the court consequently granted summary judgment in favour of the CIA, Executive Office for United States Attorneys, Department of State, Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service, removing them from the proceedings.
However, claims involving the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) remained under consideration.
The statement said the FBI and DEA, in compliance with court orders, subsequently released 399 pages of records, although portions were redacted under exemptions contained in US law.
Greenspan challenged the redactions and sought the release of the documents without them.
The Presidency said the FBI and DEA, through the US Department of Justice, opposed the request on several grounds, including protections covering grand jury proceedings, attorney-client communications and work product, law enforcement records, personal privacy, confidential sources and investigative techniques.
It added that Tinubu, on the advice of his lawyers, had also asserted his rights under FOIA Exemption 7(C), which protects personal privacy in law enforcement records.
“The release or withholding of records under FOIA does not, by itself, establish criminal liability,” the statement said, stressing that the dispute concerns access to government records and the proper application of statutory exemptions.
The Presidency also pointed to a 2003 letter from the American Consulate in Lagos to the then Inspector General of Police, Tafa Balogun, stating that an FBI records check had found no criminal arrest records, wants or warrants for Tinubu, who was then governor of Lagos State.
On the current litigation, the Presidency said Greenspan has until September 11, 2026, to file his opposition and reply to the processes filed by the defendants and Tinubu, while the FBI, DEA and Tinubu have until September 18 to respond to any processes filed by the plaintiff.
The statement also dismissed recent commentary by Karl von Batten, saying he and his client, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, are not parties to 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 Presidency said.
It stressed that the case would be determined by Judge Beryl A. Howell of the US District Court based on the evidence, applicable law and arguments presented by the parties.
The Presidency therefore urged the Nigerian media and the public to distinguish between verified court proceedings and what it described as partisan speculation.