Presidency says Tinubu’s US court case is not a criminal trial

The Presidency has said the ongoing court case involving President Bola Tinubu in the United States is not a criminal trial, insisting that the litigation is a civil dispute over access to government records under the US Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

This was disclosed on Thursday, September 3, 2026, by Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, amid renewed public attention on court filings involving records released by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).

On August 30, it was reported that new court filings involving the FBI and the DEA revealed that an FBI search responsive to requests concerning President Bola Tinubu produced 399 pages of documents, bringing renewed attention to the long-running FOIA case involving records relating to the Nigerian president.

What they are saying

The Presidency said recent reports and public commentary had wrongly portrayed the ongoing litigation as a criminal case against Tinubu.

• “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.

According to the Presidency, the case began in 2022 after Aaron Greenspan submitted FOIA requests to several US government agencies seeking records relating to Tinubu.

Greenspan subsequently filed a lawsuit in 2023 after some of the agencies withheld records or declined to confirm or deny their existence. Tinubu was later permitted by the court to participate in the proceedings as an intervenor.

The Presidency said several agencies were subsequently removed from the case, leaving aspects of the litigation involving the FBI and DEA for further consideration.

• “In compliance with the court’s orders, the FBI and DEA produced 399 pages of records, with portions redacted under exemptions provided by United States law. The Plaintiff challenged the FBI and DEA’s decisions to redact portions of the documents produced,” the statement said.

It said the current dispute is centred on whether the FBI and DEA can lawfully maintain those redactions under exemptions contained in the US FOIA.

Get up to speed

In 2025, the Federal Government reacted to widespread reports that a US District Court ruling could lead to the release of additional records connected to a purported federal investigation involving Tinubu in the 1990s.

• In its reaction at the time, the government argued that there was “nothing new to be revealed,” saying reports by FBI agent Kevin Moss and the DEA had been in the public domain for decades and did not indict Tinubu.
• The broader dispute dates back to the early 1990s, including a 1993 US civil forfeiture proceeding involving about $460,000 in funds linked to bank accounts associated with Tinubu. The matter became a major political controversy ahead of Nigeria’s 2023 presidential election.

Festus Keyamo, then spokesman for the APC Presidential Campaign Council, argued that the forfeited funds were related to tax liabilities and not proceeds from drug trafficking, maintaining that Tinubu was neither charged nor convicted in the case.

What you should know

Questions surrounding Tinubu’s past became a major feature of the campaign leading to the February 2023 presidential election, with opposition figures repeatedly raising issues concerning the 1993 US forfeiture case and allegations relating to his academic records.

• The controversy over his education intensified after Atiku Abubakar sought documents from Chicago State University (CSU) in the United States for use in his election challenge. Atiku argued that the authenticity of a diploma submitted by Tinubu to the Independent National Electoral Commission was in question, while Tinubu maintained that he graduated from CSU.
• A US federal court eventually ordered the university to produce relevant records, while court documents noted that CSU had stated that Tinubu attended the institution and received a degree in 1979.
• The separate controversy over the $460,000 forfeiture also remained politically significant during the election campaign. Court documents from the 1993 civil forfeiture proceedings stated that US authorities had probable cause to link the funds to narcotics trafficking, while Tinubu and his political allies have consistently rejected allegations that he was criminally indicted or convicted.

The latest FOIA case has again revived interest in those longstanding controversies, but the Presidency insists that the case currently before the US court is a records-disclosure dispute rather than a criminal proceeding against Tinubu.