The Presidency emphasized that Tinubu is not facing criminal justice in the US record case

The Presidency has rejected claims that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is facing a criminal case in the United States, and stated that the legal proceedings currently filed in a Washington, DC court only concern the disclosure of government records under the US Freedom of Information Act.

The clarification was contained in a statement issued on Thursday by the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, who said that the lawsuit filed by American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan was a civil matter and did not result in any criminal findings against the Nigerian President.

“To be clear, this matter is a civil records disclosure dispute under the United States Freedom of Information Act. This is not a criminal case against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, nor has the court found him guilty of any criminal offense,” Onanuga said.

According to a presidential spokesman, Greenspan began seeking records from several American government agencies in 2022 before filing Civil Suit No. 23-1816 in 2023 in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Tinubu was later given permission by the court to participate in the trial as an intervenor.

Also read: Reps urge indebted DisCos to settle market obligations

Onanuga explained that several government agencies, including the Central Intelligence Agency, the Executive Office of the United States Attorney, the Department of State, the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service, have been removed from the lawsuit after obtaining summary judgment based on the “Glomar defense,” which allows an agency to neither confirm nor deny the existence of certain records.

However, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Drug Enforcement Administration remain parties to the case and have released 399 pages of documents, with some portions withheld or redacted based on exceptions provided by American law.

The Presidency explained the legal basis for the redactions, stating, “Some documents are protected from public disclosure by law, for example, Grand Jury proceedings. The law exempts transcripts of Grand Jury proceedings from public disclosure. The Pen Register Act also protects from disclosure information about certain court orders authorizing or approving the installation and use of pen registers or trap and trace devices. (FOIA Exception 3).

“Some documents fall within attorney work product and attorney-client privilege. Some documents contain instances in which FBI and DEA agents sought and/or received legal advice from USDoJ attorneys. (FOIA Exception 5).

“Some documents were prepared for law enforcement purposes (FOIA Exemption 5).

“Some documents contain information that, if disclosed, could lead to an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy (FOIA Exceptions 6 and 7(C)).

“Some documents, if disclosed, would reveal the identity of confidential sources or compromise the techniques law enforcement agencies use in investigating crimes (FOIA Exceptions 7(D) and 7(E)).”

Onanuga said Tinubu also relied on the privacy protections available under the FOIA framework in defending his interests in this matter.

The statement said Greenspan has until September 11 to respond to the submissions made by the defendants and interveners, while the FBI, DEA and Tinubu are expected to provide further responses on September 18.

The president’s aide also rejected Karl von Batten’s recent comments, arguing that neither the individual nor his client were recognized parties to the proceedings.

“The Nigerian media should be aware that this case is exclusively in the control of Judge Beryl A. Howell of the United States District Court. She will determine the outcome, based on the evidence, applicable law, and the arguments of the parties, not the wishes of Alhaji Atiku Abubakar or his agent, Mr. Von Batten,” he said.

He urged journalists and media organizations to differentiate “verified litigation and partisan speculation.”

The dispute stems from a series of 12 FOIA requests filed by Greenspan between 2022 and 2023. The requests requested documents from six US federal agencies related to an investigation into heroin trafficking in Chicago in the early 1990s involving Tinubu and three others – Lee Andrew Edwards, Mueez Abegboyega Akande, and Abiodun Agbele.

After the agencies initially issued a “Glomar” response, but refused to confirm or deny whether the records existed, Greenspan took legal action in June 2023. Judge Beryl Howell later ruled in April 2025 that the denial was “illogical and unreasonable,” directing the FBI and DEA to process the requested records.

Tinubu was later allowed to participate in the case as an intervention to protect his privacy interests, and the Presidency insisted that the ongoing proceedings remained a civil dispute over access to government records and not a criminal complaint against the President.