The Presidency has clarified that the ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case involving records relating to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu before a United States federal court is a civil records-disclosure dispute and not a criminal case against the Nigerian president, Peak Newspaper reports.
The clarification was contained in a statement issued on Thursday by Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy.
According to Onanuga, the case before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia concerns requests for access to government records under the US Freedom of Information Act.
He explained that the matter began in 2022 when Aaron Greenspan submitted FOIA requests to several US government agencies seeking records relating to Tinubu.
The agencies subsequently withheld some records or declined to confirm or deny whether certain records existed, prompting Greenspan to file Civil Action No. 23-1816 before the US District Court in 2023.
The court later allowed President Tinubu to participate in the case as an intervenor.
The Presidency said the US agencies involved had relied on what is known as the “Glomar defence”, a legal position that allows government agencies, in certain circumstances, to neither confirm nor deny the existence of particular investigative records.
Onanuga said the defence is intended to protect sensitive law-enforcement information, including investigative sources, personnel and techniques.
According to the statement, the court granted summary judgment in favour of the CIA, Executive Office for United States Attorneys, Department of State, Department of the Treasury and Internal Revenue Service, removing them from the proceedings.
However, issues involving the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) remained before the court.
The Presidency said the FBI and DEA subsequently released 399 pages of records, although portions were redacted under exemptions provided by US law.
Greenspan challenged the agencies’ decision to withhold parts of the documents.
The agencies, through the US Department of Justice, argued that some of the information could not legally be disclosed because it relates to protected matters, including grand jury proceedings and information covered by the Pen Register Act.
Other exemptions cited include attorney-client and attorney work-product privileges, law-enforcement records, personal privacy, confidential sources and investigative techniques.
Onanuga said President Tinubu, acting on legal advice, had also asserted his rights under FOIA Exemption 7(C), which provides protection for certain personal information contained in law-enforcement records.
The Presidency stressed that the release or withholding of records under the US FOIA does not, by itself, establish criminal liability.
“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 said.
The Presidency also disclosed that the plaintiff has until September 11, 2026, to file an opposition and reply to the processes submitted by the defendants and intervenor, while the FBI, DEA and the intervenor have until September 18, 2026, to respond.
Onanuga further urged Nigerian media organisations and members of the public to distinguish between the ongoing court proceedings and political claims surrounding the case.
He maintained that the matter remains under the control of Judge Beryl A. Howell of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, who will determine whether the redactions made by the FBI and DEA are lawful.
The Presidency also disputed recent public claims concerning the involvement of Atiku Abubakar and Karl Von Batten, saying neither was a party to the case.
The statement concluded by urging the media to rely on verified court proceedings and applicable US law rather than political commentary when reporting the matter.
