…President Cites Privacy Laws, Lack Of Public Interest, Political Motives
….Opposition Demands Disclosure, Says Nigerians Deserve To know The Truth
Daud Olatunji
President Bola Tinubu has asked a United States federal court to reject a bid seeking the release of his unredacted records held by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Drug Enforcement Administration.
Tinubu, through his legal team, argued that the records should remain undisclosed because they are protected by United States privacy laws, contain sensitive law-enforcement information and are not subject to release merely because of public interest in his political career.
The President’s position was contained in court filings submitted to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by American transparency activist, Aaron Greenspan.
Tinubu’s lawyers argued that the US Freedom of Information Act was designed primarily to promote transparency about government activities and not to provide access to private information about individuals whose names appear in government files.
The legal team, comprising Christopher Carmichael, Victor Henderson and Oluwole Afolabi, also challenged Greenspan’s claim that Nigerians’ interest in knowing about the President’s past constituted a public interest sufficient to override privacy protections.
According to the lawyers, the records sought are covered by FOIA Exemption 7(C), which protects personal information contained in law-enforcement records where disclosure could constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy.
They also argued that the US Privacy Act provided additional protection for the records.
The President’s lawyers maintained that the request appeared to be driven by political considerations in Nigeria, rather than an effort to expose wrongdoing by the US government.
They said Greenspan’s filings showed that his “singular focus” was obtaining government documents containing Tinubu’s name.
The lawyers urged the court not to allow the FOIA process to become a mechanism for accessing private information simply because the person concerned occupies a powerful political office.
Dispute over Tinubu’s US records
The legal battle is the latest development in a controversy over Tinubu’s historical dealings with US authorities, which became prominent during the build-up to Nigeria’s 2023 presidential election.
At the centre of the controversy was a 1993 civil forfeiture proceeding in the United States involving funds held in an account associated with Tinubu.
A US court in Illinois ordered the forfeiture of $460,000 after US authorities alleged that the money represented proceeds connected with narcotics trafficking or prohibited financial transactions.
Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress maintained during the 2023 election litigation that the proceeding was civil forfeiture and did not amount to a criminal conviction.
The Labour Party and its presidential candidate at the time, Peter Obi, had argued that the forfeiture had implications for Tinubu’s eligibility to contest the presidential election.
However, the Presidential Election Petition Court, in its September 2023 judgment, held that the petitioners had failed to establish that Tinubu had been arrested, arraigned, convicted or sentenced in a criminal case in the United States.
Despite the ruling, questions about the President’s US records have continued, with individuals and groups seeking access to official documents relating to his past dealings with American law-enforcement agencies.
FBI, DEA records
Greenspan’s request reportedly includes the entire FBI file relating to Tinubu and FBI Form 302 interview records covering the period between 1992 and 1993.
The records have been the subject of proceedings under the US FOIA.
In April 2025, US District Judge Beryl Howell ordered the FBI and DEA to lift their previous “Glomar” responses, through which the agencies had declined to confirm or deny the existence of responsive records.
The agencies were subsequently directed to process the records in accordance with applicable legal exemptions.
The FBI has continued to withhold or redact portions of the records, citing provisions relating to law-enforcement information, personal privacy, investigative techniques and the safety of individuals.
Tinubu’s latest court filing seeks to sustain the withholding and redaction of the documents.
His lawyers also rejected arguments that his privacy interests had been extinguished because some information concerning the historical investigation had already entered the public domain.
They maintained that the disclosure of some aspects of a matter did not automatically remove an individual’s right to privacy over information that had never been made public.
The lawyers further disputed suggestions that the withheld documents could expose a secret prosecution or an undisclosed agreement by US authorities not to prosecute Tinubu, describing such claims as speculative and unsupported by evidence.
They argued that Greenspan had not demonstrated any wrongdoing by US agencies capable of justifying the release of otherwise protected law-enforcement records.
Opposition demands disclosure
The President’s position has drawn criticism from opposition political parties, which insist that Nigerians have a legitimate interest in information concerning the background of the country’s President.
The African Democratic Congress spokesperson, Bolaji Abdullahi, described Tinubu’s opposition to the release of the records as suspicious and urged him to allow their disclosure if he had nothing to hide.
“Why is the President opposing the release of his past records? That is suspicious,” Abdullahi said.
He argued that releasing the records would provide Tinubu with an opportunity to clear his name and bring the controversy to an end.
The National Publicity Secretary of the Nigeria Democratic Congress, Osa Director, also said Nigerians deserved to know the truth.
Director rejected the argument that the records were being sought for political reasons, saying political interest should not prevent the public from obtaining information capable of settling longstanding questions surrounding the President’s past.
He urged Tinubu to allow the documents to be released, arguing that the controversy had persisted for decades.
However, the ongoing FOIA proceedings do not amount to a criminal prosecution of Tinubu, nor do they constitute a judicial finding that the President committed a drug-trafficking offence.
'
'Do you want to share a story with us? Do you want to advertise with us? Do you need publicity for a product, service, or event? Contact us on WhatsApp +2348183319097 Email: platformtimes@gmail.com
We are committed to impactful investigative journalism for human interest and social justice. Your donation will help us tell more stories. Kindly donate any amount HERE
