FOIA Case In U.S. Not Criminal Case Against Tinubu, No Guilt Found – Presidency Clarifies

The Presidency has clarified issues surrounding the ongoing Freedom of Information Act, FOIA, case before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, saying it is not a criminal case against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

In a statement on Thursday, the Presidency noted recent speculative reports concerning the case and said for clarity, the matter is a civil records-disclosure dispute under the United States Freedom of Information Act.

According to the statement, it is not a criminal case against President Tinubu, nor has the court found him guilty of any criminal wrongdoing.

The Presidency explained that the background to the case dates back 23 years, after the American Consulate in Lagos, in a letter dated February 4, 2003, informed the then Inspector General of Police, Mr. Tafa Balogun, that an FBI records check found no criminal arrest records, wants, or warrants for then Governor Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

It stated that in 2022, Mr. Aaron Greenspan, who it said is known to work with Nigerian opposition figures including David Hundeyin and Atiku Abubakar, submitted FOIA requests to several United States government agencies seeking records relating to President Tinubu.

After the agencies withheld certain records or declined to confirm or deny their existence, Mr. Greenspan commenced Civil Action No. 23-1816 before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in 2023.

The court subsequently permitted President Tinubu to participate in the proceedings as an intervenor.

During the proceedings, the Defendants asserted the “Glomar defence”, a standard defence that US law enforcement agencies invoke from time to time, which simply means the government agency is not “in a position to deny or admit” the existence of an investigation. It protects government personnel and the techniques and sources law enforcement agencies use to investigate and prosecute crimes.

Based on the invocation of this defence, the United States District Court granted summary judgment in favour of the CIA, EOUSA, Department of State, Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service, IRS. It ruled that they be removed from the proceedings, leaving aspects of the claims involving the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Drug Enforcement Administration for further consideration.

In compliance with the court’s orders, the FBI and DEA produced 399 pages of records, with portions redacted under exemptions provided by United States law. The Plaintiff challenged the FBI and DEA’s decisions to redact portions of the documents produced.

The FBI and DEA, through the United States Department of Justice, pushed back against the Plaintiff’s requests. The FBI and DEA rejected the application to produce the documents without redactions for several reasons, including that some documents are protected from public disclosure by law, such as Grand Jury proceedings and information under the Pen Register Act, under FOIA Exemption 3.

Other reasons cited include attorney-work product and attorney-client privileges where agents sought or received legal advice, documents prepared for law enforcement purposes under Exemption 5, information that could lead to unwarranted invasion of personal privacy under Exemptions 6 and 7(C), and documents that could reveal identities of confidential sources or compromise law enforcement techniques under Exemptions 7(D) and 7(E).

The statement added that President Bola Tinubu, on advice of his lawyers, has also asserted his rights as guaranteed by FOIA Exemption 7(C).

According to the Presidency, the Plaintiff has until September 11, 2026, to file any opposition and reply to the Defendants’ and Intervener’s processes.