The Presidency has moved to clarify recent reports surrounding an ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case involving records relating to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
In a statement issued on Thursday by the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, the Presidency stressed that the matter is a civil dispute over access to government records under US FOIA law, and not a criminal case against President Tinubu.
The Presidency said the court has neither charged nor found Tinubu guilty of any criminal wrongdoing in connection with the proceedings.
According to the statement, the background to the case dates back to February 4, 2003, when the American Consulate in Lagos informed the then Inspector General of Police, Tafa Balogun, that an FBI records check had found no criminal arrest records, wants or warrants for Bola Ahmed Tinubu, who was then Governor of Lagos State.
The Presidency said that in 2022, Aaron Greenspan submitted FOIA requests to several United States government agencies seeking records relating to Tinubu.
After some agencies withheld certain records or declined to confirm or deny their existence, Greenspan commenced Civil Action No. 23-1816 before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in 2023.
The court subsequently allowed President Tinubu to participate in the proceedings as an intervenor.
During the case, the government agencies invoked what is known under US law as the “Glomar defence,” a mechanism that allows law enforcement agencies, in certain circumstances, to decline to confirm or deny whether particular investigative records exist.
The Presidency explained that the defence is designed to protect government personnel, confidential sources and investigative techniques used by law enforcement agencies.
Based on the defence, the court granted summary judgment in favour of the CIA, the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, the Department of State, the Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service, removing them from the proceedings.
The statement said remaining aspects of the case involving the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) proceeded for further consideration.
Following court orders, the FBI and DEA produced 399 pages of records, although portions of the documents were redacted pursuant to exemptions under US law.
The plaintiff subsequently challenged the agencies’ decisions to withhold portions of the records, seeking the release of documents without the redactions.
The FBI and DEA, through the US Department of Justice, opposed the request, citing several statutory exemptions.
The Presidency said the exemptions cover information protected by law, including grand jury proceedings and certain information relating to court-authorised pen register or trap-and-trace devices.
Other exemptions cited relate to attorney-client and attorney-work-product privileges, law enforcement materials, personal privacy, confidential sources and investigative techniques.
President Tinubu has also asserted his rights under the FOIA privacy exemption, according to the statement.
The Presidency said the plaintiff has until September 11, 2026, to file opposition and reply to the processes submitted by the defendants and the intervenor, while the FBI, DEA and the intervenor have until September 18, 2026, to respond.
The statement emphasised that the release or withholding of government records under FOIA does not, by itself, establish criminal liability.
It said the central question before the court is whether the redactions made by the FBI and DEA are lawful under applicable US law.
The Presidency also pushed back against recent political commentary surrounding the case, saying that individuals who have publicly portrayed themselves as central to the proceedings are not parties to the litigation.
It stressed that the matter remains under the control of the United States District Court and will be determined by the presiding judge based on the evidence, applicable law and arguments presented by the parties.
The Presidency consequently urged Nigerian media organisations and the public to distinguish between the actual court proceedings and what it described as partisan or speculative commentary.
It reiterated that the case is a civil FOIA records-disclosure dispute and does not constitute a criminal charge, trial or judicial finding against President Tinubu.