The presidency has clarified that the ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case involving President Bola Tinubu in the United States is a civil records-disclosure dispute and not a criminal proceeding.
Bayo Onanuga, special adviser to the president on
information and strategy, said in a statement issued on Thursday that no US
court had found Tinubu guilty of criminal wrongdoing in the case.
“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 Ahmed Tinubu, nor has the court found him
guilty of any criminal wrongdoing,” the statement reads.
The clarification follows recent commentary on the suit
before the United States district court for the District of Columbia, where a
dispute is ongoing over the release of records held by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) concerning
Tinubu.
Tinubu, who joined the case as an intervenor, has asked the
court to allow the FBI and DEA to maintain redactions and withholdings in
documents already released to Aaron Greenspan, founder of PlainSite.
Greenspan filed FOIA requests in 2022 and 2023 seeking
records from six US government agencies concerning investigations linked to a
Chicago drug-trafficking case in the early 1990s. Tinubu was among four people
named in the requests.
His requests included what he described as the “entire FBI
file” on Tinubu and FBI interview records from 1992 to 1993.
Several of the agencies initially declined to confirm or
deny whether they had records relating to Tinubu, relying on what is known as
the “Glomar” response.
In April 2025, Beryl Howell, a US district judge, ruled that
the FBI and DEA had not adequately justified their refusal to confirm or deny
the existence of records relating to Tinubu.
Howell ordered the two agencies to search for and process
non-exempt records responsive to Greenspan’s requests.
Following the ruling, the FBI and DEA produced thousands of
pages of documents, some of which contained redactions. The agencies also
provided a Vaughn index setting out the basis for some of the withheld
information.
Greenspan subsequently asked the court to order further
disclosure, arguing that the agencies had not fully complied with the court’s
order.
In a response filed on August 28, Tinubu argued that the
records should remain partly withheld or redacted, citing privacy protections
under US law.
His lawyers said FOIA is intended to provide information
about government activities and not to expose private information collected by
government agencies about individuals.
They relied on FOIA Exemption 7(C), which protects
law-enforcement records where disclosure could constitute an unwarranted
invasion of personal privacy, as well as provisions of the US Privacy Act.
Tinubu’s lawyers also argued that Howell’s 2025 ruling,
which rejected the FBI and DEA’s Glomar responses, did not eliminate his
privacy rights over the contents of any investigative files.
‘IT’S A CIVIL RECORDS-DISCLOSURE DISPUTE’
However, Onanuga said the FBI and DEA had so far produced
399 pages of records, with portions withheld under exemptions provided by US
law.
He said the exemptions cover, among other things, grand-jury
proceedings, attorney-client and attorney-work-product privileges,
law-enforcement information, personal privacy, confidential sources and
investigative techniques.
Onanuga said Tinubu had also asserted his rights under FOIA
Exemption 7(C), adding that the court’s decision on whether information should
be released or withheld would 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,” he said.
The presidential spokesperson also referred to a February 4,
2003, letter from the American Consulate in Lagos to Tafa Balogun, then
inspector-general of police (IGP).
According to Onanuga, the letter said an FBI records check
had found no criminal arrest records, wants or warrants for Tinubu, who was
then governor of Lagos State.
He said the plaintiff has until September 11 to file an
opposition and reply to the processes filed by the defendants and Tinubu, while
the FBI, DEA and the president have until September 18 to respond.
Onanuga also said the presidency rejected recent claims
concerning the involvement of Atiku Abubakar and Karl Von Batten in the
litigation, saying neither is a party to the case.
He urged the media and public to distinguish the court
proceedings from what the presidency described as partisan commentary, saying
the US court would determine whether the disputed redactions are lawful based
on the applicable law and evidence.
Advertise on NigerianEye.com to reach thousands of our daily users
No comments
Post a Comment
Kindly drop a comment below.
(Comments are moderated. Clean comments will be approved immediately)
Advert Enquires - Reach out to us at NigerianEye@gmail.com