Tinubu US case not criminal, Presidency clarifies
Summarized by DistantNews. Read the original for the full story.
At a glance
- Nigeria’s Presidency said a Freedom of Information case involving President Bola Tinubu in a U.S. court concerns records disclosure, not criminal charges.
- It said the case began with records requests submitted in 2022 and that Tinubu joined the proceedings as an intervenor.
- The Presidency said several agencies won summary judgment, while disputes over redacted FBI and DEA records remained under consideration.
Nigeria’s Presidency has moved to draw a clear line around President Bola Tinubu’s legal dispute in the United States: it is a civil records case, not a criminal prosecution.
In a statement, presidential adviser Bayo Onanuga said the proceedings before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia did not involve a criminal charge, trial or finding against Tinubu. The case began in 2022, when Aaron Greenspan requested records concerning Tinubu from several U.S. government agencies. After the agencies withheld some records or declined to confirm whether they existed, Greenspan filed a civil action in 2023. The court later allowed Tinubu to participate as an intervenor.
“For clarity, the matter is a civil records-disclosure dispute under the United States Freedom of Information Act. It is not a criminal case against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, nor has the court found him guilty of any criminal wrongdoing,” the statement said.
For clarity, the matter is a civil records-disclosure dispute under the United States Freedom of Information Act. It is not a criminal case against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, nor has the court found him guilty of any criminal wrongdoing.
The Presidency also referred to a February 4, 2003, letter from the U.S. Consulate in Lagos to then Inspector-General of Police Tafa Balogun. It said an FBI records check found no criminal arrest records or warrants for Tinubu, who was governor at the time.
The statement explained that agencies invoked the “Glomar defence,” which allows the U.S. government to decline to confirm or deny whether an investigation exists. The court granted summary judgment to the CIA, the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, the State Department, the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service, removing them from the case.
The FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration remained involved in disputes over redactions. The agencies produced 399 pages under court orders, but Greenspan challenged portions withheld under Freedom of Information Act exemptions.
It simply means the government agency is not ‘in a position to deny or admit’ the existence of an investigation. It protects government personnel and the techniques and sources law enforcement agencies use to investigate and prosecute crimes.
Originally published by The Punch. Summarized and contextualized automatically by DistantNews, with a note on how the source frames the story. Not individually reviewed before publishing. How this works.