Follow Us on Google
•President’s legal team files 16-page court submission
By Oluseye Ojo
President Bola Tinubu has asked a United States federal court to stop the release of investigative records concerning him, including files linked to historical investigations and a 1993 civil forfeiture proceeding involving about $460,000.
His legal team, in a 16-page filing before the US District Court for the District of Columbia, urged the court to uphold redactions and withholdings imposed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
The submission, filed on August 28 by Christopher W. Carmichael, Victor P. Henderson and Oluwole O. Afolabi, opposes a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit brought by an American transparency activist, Aaron Greenspan, who is seeking access to records relating to investigations involving Tinubu.
Among the materials sought by Greenspan are the FBI’s entire file on Tinubu and FBI Form 302 interview records covering 1992 and 1993.
The case also concerns records connected to a 1993 civil forfeiture proceeding in the United States involving approximately $460,000 allegedly linked to Tinubu.
The president has consistently denied any wrongdoing.
In the latest court filing, his lawyers argued that releasing the records could infringe on the president’s privacy rights, maintaining that the limited information previously disclosed during the forfeiture proceedings did not expose the details or outcome of any possible criminal investigation.
They contended that the fact that some information might have entered the public domain did not extinguish Tinubu’s privacy interest in the wider government investigative files.
The lawyers cited US Supreme Court and lower-court decisions to support their position, and argued that the public disclosure of scattered information from a government file does not automatically make the entire file subject to disclosure.
They also relied on decisions including Judicial Watch, Inc. v. United States Department of Justice and Electronic Privacy Information Center v. United States Department of Justice.
Other News
They contended that being publicly associated with an investigation is different from exposing the confidential contents of the investigative files.
“Regardless of the prior disclosure in the forfeiture proceeding, Intervenor retains a privacy interest in potential disclosure of the investigative files sought by Plaintiff,” the lawyers stated.
The legal battle dated back to FOIA requests submitted by Greenspan in 2022 and 2023. In April 2025, US District Judge, Beryl Howell, ruled that the FBI and DEA could no longer rely on ‘Glomar’ responses to refuse to confirm or deny the existence of the requested records.
Howell ordered the agencies to process non-exempt records responsive to Greenspan’s requests.
According to the lawyers, the ruling did not establish that Tinubu committed drug trafficking or any other crime. They added that it did not also amount to a criminal conviction.
They stated that rather, the ruling addressed the government agencies’ obligations under FOIA and whether the records could lawfully be withheld.
The FBI has also asked the court for permission to submit sensitive information under seal to explain why parts of the requested records should remain undisclosed.
The agency cited exemptions relating to personal privacy, confidential sources, law-enforcement methods and information that could endanger an individual’s life or physical safety.
Tinubu had earlier joined the US Justice Department in seeking additional time to respond to the court’s orders, although Judge Howell declined to grant the full extension sought by the government.
With the latest filing, the lawyers said, the president has directly challenged the attempt to obtain the records, leaving the court to determine whether the FBI and DEA can continue withholding or redacting portions of the files or whether more documents must be released.
