The Presidency has clarified that the ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case involving records related to President Bola Tinubu before a United States federal court is a civil records-disclosure dispute and not a criminal case.
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 case, filed before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, arose from FOIA requests submitted in 2022 by Aaron Greenspan to several US government agencies seeking records relating to Tinubu.
According to the Presidency, the agencies withheld some records or declined to confirm or deny their existence, prompting Greenspan to institute Civil Action No. 23-1816 in 2023.
The court subsequently allowed Tinubu to participate in the proceedings as an intervenor.
The Presidency said the US agencies involved invoked the “Glomar defence,” a legal mechanism that allows government agencies to refuse to confirm or deny whether certain investigative records exist.
Following the invocation of the defence, the court reportedly granted summary judgment in favour of the CIA, EOUSA, Department of State, Department of the Treasury and Internal Revenue Service, removing them from the proceedings.
The remaining aspects of the case involve the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
Onanuga said the FBI and DEA have so far produced 399 pages of records, although portions were redacted under exemptions provided by US law.
The agencies reportedly argued that some of the documents could not be publicly disclosed because they contained information relating to grand jury proceedings, the Pen Register Act, law-enforcement investigations, confidential sources, investigative techniques and personal privacy.
The Presidency added that Tinubu, acting on the advice of his lawyers, had also asserted his rights under FOIA Exemption 7(C), which concerns the protection of personal privacy in law-enforcement records.
According to the statement, the plaintiff has until September 11, 2026, to file an opposition and reply to the processes submitted by the defendants and Tinubu, while the FBI, DEA and the President have until September 18 to respond.
The Presidency stressed that the release or withholding of records under FOIA does 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,” the statement said.
Onanuga also dismissed recent claims by Karl Von Batten that he and his client were central to the proceedings, stating that neither was a party to the case.
The Presidency maintained that the outcome of the matter would be determined by Judge Beryl A. Howell of the US District Court for the District of Columbia based on the evidence, applicable law and arguments presented by the parties.
It therefore urged the media and the public to distinguish between verified court proceedings and what it described as partisan speculation surrounding the case.
