The Presidency has clarified that the ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation involving President Bola Ahmed Tinubu in the United States is a civil records-disclosure dispute and does not amount to a criminal trial or charge against the Nigerian leader.
The clarification followed what the Presidency described as recent speculative reports concerning the case before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
In a statement on Thursday, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, said the litigation, identified as Civil Action No. 23-1816, centres on requests for access to government records relating to Tinubu and the legality of redactions made to documents subsequently released by U.S. agencies.
The Presidency said the matter originated in 2022 when Aaron Greenspan submitted FOIA requests to several U.S. government agencies seeking records relating to Tinubu.
Following the agencies’ refusal to release certain records or confirm or deny their existence, Greenspan instituted the suit in 2023.
The court later permitted Tinubu to participate in the proceedings as an intervenor.
According to the Presidency, some of the U.S. agencies invoked the “Glomar defence”, a legal position that allows government agencies in certain circumstances to neither confirm nor deny the existence of records where disclosure could compromise protected information.
The court subsequently granted summary judgment in favour of the CIA, the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, the Department of State, the Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service, removing them from the proceedings.
The Presidency said the remaining aspects of the case involve the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
It said the two agencies, in compliance with court orders, produced 399 pages of records, although portions were redacted under exemptions provided by U.S. law.
Greenspan subsequently challenged the redactions and sought the release of the documents without them.
The FBI and DEA, through the U.S. Department of Justice, opposed the request, citing several FOIA exemptions.
The exemptions, according to the Presidency, cover information protected by law, including grand jury proceedings; attorney-client communications and attorney work product; certain law-enforcement records; personal privacy; confidential sources; and investigative techniques.
Tinubu, on the advice of his lawyers, has also asserted his rights under FOIA Exemption 7(C), which provides protection for personal privacy in certain law-enforcement records.
The Presidency stressed that the release or withholding of records under FOIA does not, in itself, establish criminal liability.
It said the court is presently concerned with whether the redactions made by the FBI and DEA are lawful under applicable U.S. law.
The statement further disclosed that the plaintiff has until September 11, 2026, to file opposition and reply to processes submitted by the defendants and the President as intervenor.
The FBI, DEA and the President, as intervenor, have until September 18 to respond to any processes filed by the plaintiff.
The Presidency also rejected suggestions that former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and Karl von Batten are central to the proceedings, stressing that neither is a party to the case.
It said the outcome of the litigation rests with Judge Beryl A. Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, who will determine the matter based on the evidence, applicable law and submissions of the parties.
The Presidency urged the Nigerian media and the public to distinguish between the actual court proceedings and what it described as partisan or speculative commentary.
“The litigation is a civil records-disclosure dispute under FOIA. It does not constitute a criminal charge, trial, or judicial finding against President Tinubu,” the statement said.
