The Presidency has clarified that the ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia is a civil records-disclosure dispute and not a criminal case against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. The court has not found the President guilty of any criminal wrongdoing.

In a statement issued on September 3, 2026, Special Adviser to the President (Information and Strategy), Bayo Onanuga, addressed recent speculative reports surrounding the matter.

The statement recalled that 23 years ago, on February 4, 2003, the American Consulate in Lagos informed the then Inspector General of Police, Mr Tafa Balogun, that an FBI records check found no criminal arrest records, wants, or warrants for then Governor Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

In 2022, Mr Aaron Greenspan, known to work with Nigerian opposition figures including David Hundeyin and Atiku Abubakar, submitted FOIA requests to several United States government agencies seeking records relating to President Tinubu. After the agencies withheld certain records or declined to confirm or deny their existence, Mr Greenspan filed Civil Action No. 23-1816 in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in 2023. The court later allowed President Tinubu to participate as an intervenor.

During the proceedings, the defendants invoked the “Glomar defence,” a standard position under which a US government agency neither confirms nor denies the existence of records in order to protect personnel, techniques, and sources. On this basis, the court granted summary judgment in favour of the CIA, EOUSA, Department of State, Department of the Treasury, and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), removing them from the case. Claims involving the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) remained for further consideration.

In compliance with court orders, the FBI and DEA produced 399 pages of records with portions redacted under statutory exemptions. The plaintiff challenged the redactions. The agencies, through the United States Department of Justice, defended the withholdings on the following grounds:

• Protection of grand jury materials and pen register information under FOIA Exemption 3
• Attorney-work product and attorney-client privileges under FOIA Exemption 5
• Records prepared for law enforcement purposes under FOIA Exemption 5
• Protection against unwarranted invasion of personal privacy under FOIA Exemptions 6 and 7(C)
• Protection of confidential sources and law enforcement techniques under FOIA Exemptions 7(D) and 7(E)

President Tinubu has also asserted his rights under FOIA Exemption 7(C) on the advice of his lawyers.

The plaintiff has until September 11, 2026, to file any opposition, while the FBI, DEA, and the intervenor have until September 18, 2026, to respond.

The Presidency emphasised that 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. It remains exclusively under the control of Judge Beryl A. Howell of the United States District Court, who will decide the matter based on the evidence, applicable law, and the parties’ arguments—not political preferences.

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.

The Presidency urged the media and the public to distinguish verified court proceedings from partisan speculation.