Kehinde Victor | Sep 5, 2026
KEY POINTS
- The Nigerian Presidency clarified that the legal proceedings in the United States constitute a civil FOIA records dispute rather than a criminal trial against President Bola Tinubu.
- U.S. federal agencies released 399 pages of records with statutory redactions to protect law enforcement sources, investigative methods, and personal privacy.
- The court granted summary judgment removing the CIA, Department of State, and IRS from the suit, leaving only FBI and DEA redaction claims active.
MAIN STORY
The Nigerian Presidency has clarified recently that an ongoing United States court case involving President Bola Tinubu is a civil records-disclosure dispute under the Freedom of Information Act, not a criminal proceeding.
Presidential Spokesperson Bayo Onanuga issued the statement in Abuja to counter public speculation regarding Civil Action No. 23-1816, initiated by Aaron Greenspan in 2023. The lawsuit followed requests seeking records from multiple United States government agencies.
The United States District Court for the District of Columbia permitted President Tinubu to participate as an intervenor. The court subsequently granted summary judgment in favor of the CIA, Department of State, Internal Revenue Service, and two other agencies, removing them from the suit.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation and Drug Enforcement Administration produced 399 pages of records containing statutory redactions to protect grand jury materials, personal privacy, and investigative methods. Both agencies opposed releasing unredacted files.
“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 Tinubu, nor has the court found him guilty of any criminal wrongdoing.” — Bayo Onanuga, Presidential Spokesperson.
A 2003 letter from the American Consulate in Lagos previously confirmed that an FBI background check found no criminal arrest records or warrants for President Tinubu.
THE ISSUES The litigation highlights the ongoing political and public scrutiny surrounding historical records requests involving public officials, where U.S. federal agencies routinely apply Glomar responses and statutory privacy exemptions to protect confidential sources, grand jury materials, and law enforcement techniques from public disclosure.
WHAT’S BEING SAID
- “The release or withholding of records under FOIA does not, by itself, establish criminal liability. The case concerns access to government records and the proper application of statutory exemptions,” said Bayo Onanuga, Presidential Spokesperson.
- “The litigation is a civil records-disclosure dispute under FOIA. It does not constitute a criminal charge, trial, or judicial finding against President Tinubu,” said the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy.
WHAT’S NEXT
- The plaintiff has until September 11 to file any opposition and reply to the defendants’ and intervenor’s motions.
- The FBI, DEA, and President Tinubu have until September 18 to file their final responses before Judge Beryl Howell.
BOTTOM LINE
The clarification draws a clear boundary between civil administrative litigation regarding public record redactions and actual criminal proceedings, reaffirming that the court’s upcoming ruling will focus solely on statutory FOIA exemptions.
