The Presidency has clarified that an ongoing court case in the United States involving records relating to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is a civil dispute over access to government documents and does not constitute a criminal case against the Nigerian leader.
The clarification was contained in a statement issued on Thursday night by Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy.
Onanuga explained that the matter before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia arose from Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests submitted in 2022 by Aaron Greenspan to several US government agencies seeking documents connected to Tinubu.
He said the agencies either withheld some of the requested records or declined to confirm or deny whether certain documents existed, prompting Greenspan to file Civil Action No. 23-1816 in 2023.
According to the Presidency, Tinubu was later allowed to participate in the case as an intervenor.
Onanuga stressed that the proceedings should not be interpreted as an allegation or finding of criminal wrongdoing against the President.
“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,” he said.
US Agencies Withheld Some Records
The Presidential spokesman said several US agencies invoked what is known as the “Glomar defence”, a legal position that allows government agencies to decline to confirm or deny the existence of certain investigative records.
He explained that the defence is used to protect sensitive law-enforcement information, including investigative methods, sources and personnel.
The court subsequently granted summary judgment in favour of the CIA, Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA), Department of State, Department of the Treasury and Internal Revenue Service, removing them from aspects of the proceedings.
However, issues involving the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) remained before the court.
Onanuga said the FBI and DEA, through the US Department of Justice, eventually released 399 pages of records, although portions were redacted under exemptions provided by American law.
The agencies, he added, argued that some of the requested information was protected from disclosure, including materials relating to grand jury proceedings and information covered by the Pen Register Act.
Other exemptions cited reportedly included attorney-client privilege, attorney work product, law-enforcement protections, personal privacy, confidential sources and investigative techniques.
Presidency Says Tinubu Asserted FOIA Rights
Onanuga further disclosed that Tinubu, acting on legal advice, invoked his rights under FOIA Exemption 7(C), which relates to the protection of personal privacy in law-enforcement records.
He said the plaintiff has until September 11, 2026, to file an opposition and response to the processes submitted by the defendants and the President, while the FBI, DEA and Tinubu have until September 18 to respond.
The Presidency maintained that the release or withholding of documents under the FOIA should not be interpreted as evidence of criminal liability.
“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,” Onanuga stated.
The statement also referenced an earlier communication from the US Consulate in Lagos dated February 4, 2003, to then Inspector-General of Police Tafa Balogun, which the Presidency said reported that an FBI records check had found no criminal arrest records, outstanding wants or warrants for Tinubu, who was then governor of Lagos State.
Presidency Rejects Political Interpretation
Onanuga also pushed back against recent comments by Karl Von Batten, saying neither Von Batten nor his alleged client, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, is a party to the case.
He accused Von Batten of presenting himself and his client as central figures in the proceedings when, according to the Presidency, they are not parties to the litigation.
“Recent public commentary by Mr Karl von Batten has inaccurately portrayed him and his client as central to the proceedings. Neither is a party to the case,” Onanuga said.
He stressed that the final decision rests with the US court and will be determined according to the evidence and applicable law.
“The United States District Court will decide that issue based on the filings and applicable US law, not political commentary,” he added.
The Presidency consequently urged Nigerian media organisations and members of the public to distinguish between verified court proceedings and political claims surrounding the case.
“The Presidency therefore urges the media and the public to distinguish verified court proceedings from partisan speculation,” the statement concluded.
