The Presidency has rejected claims that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is facing a criminal case in the United States, maintaining that the legal proceedings currently before a Washington, DC court concern only the disclosure of government records under the US Freedom of Information Act.

The clarification was contained in a statement issued on Thursday by the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, who said the suit filed by American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan was a civil matter and had not resulted in any criminal finding against the Nigerian President.

“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,” Onanuga said.

According to the presidential spokesman, Greenspan began seeking records from several American government agencies in 2022 before filing Civil Action No. 23-1816 in 2023 at the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Tinubu was subsequently granted permission by the court to participate in the proceedings as an intervenor.

Read also: Reps urge indebted DisCos to settle market obligations

Onanuga explained that several government agencies, including the Central Intelligence Agency, Executive Office for United States Attorneys, Department of State, Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service, had been removed from the suit after obtaining summary judgment based on the “Glomar defence,” which allows an agency to neither confirm nor deny the existence of certain records.

However, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Drug Enforcement Administration remain parties to the case and have released 399 pages of documents, with portions withheld or redacted under exemptions provided by American law.

The Presidency explained the legal grounds for the redactions, stating, “Some of the documents are protected from being revealed to the public by law, for example, Grand Jury proceedings. The law exempts transcripts of Grand Jury proceedings from public disclosure. The Pen Register Act also protects from disclosure information about certain court order(s) authorising or approving the installation and use of a pen register or trap and trace device. (FOIA Exemption 3).

“Some of the documents fall squarely within the attorney-work product and attorney-client privileges. Some documents contain instances where FBI and DEA agents sought and/or received legal advice from USDoJ attorneys. (FOIA Exemption 5).

“Some of the documents were prepared for law enforcement purposes. (FOIA Exemption 5).

“Some of the documents contain information which, if revealed, could lead to an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. (FOIA Exemptions 6 and 7(C)).

“Some of the documents, if disclosed, will reveal the identities of confidential sources or compromise the techniques that law enforcement agencies use in investigating crimes. (FOIA Exemptions 7(D) and 7(E)).”

Onanuga said Tinubu had equally relied on privacy protections available under the FOIA framework in defending his interests in the matter.

The statement said Greenspan had until September 11 to respond to the filings made by the defendants and the intervenor, while the FBI, DEA and Tinubu were expected to make further responses by September 18.

The presidential aide also dismissed recent commentary by Karl von Batten, arguing that neither the individual nor his client was a recognised party in the proceedings.

“The Nigerian media should note that this case is exclusively within the control of Judge Beryl A. Howell of the United States District Court. She will determine its outcome, based on the evidence, applicable law, and the parties’ arguments, not the wishful preference of Alhaji Atiku Abubakar or his agent, Mr Von Batten,” he said.

He urged journalists and media organisations to distinguish “verified court proceedings from partisan speculation.”

The dispute originated from a series of 12 FOIA requests filed by Greenspan between 2022 and 2023. The requests sought documents from six US federal agencies relating to a Chicago heroin-trafficking investigation from the early 1990s in which Tinubu and three others — Lee Andrew Edwards, Mueez Abegboyega Akande and Abiodun Agbele — were named.

After the agencies initially issued “Glomar” responses, declining to confirm or deny whether such records existed, Greenspan instituted legal action in June 2023. Judge Beryl Howell later ruled in April 2025 that the refusals were “neither logical nor plausible,” directing the FBI and DEA to process the requested records.

Tinubu was subsequently allowed to enter the case as an intervenor to protect his privacy interests, with the Presidency insisting that the ongoing proceedings remain a civil dispute over access to government records rather than a criminal prosecution against the President.

The post Presidency insists Tinubu is not facing criminal trial in US records case appeared first on Latest Nigeria News | Top Stories from Ripples Nigeria.