Presidency Says Tinubu Not Indicted as US Court Orders Release of Records
*Says lawyers studying ruling in 30-year-old report
Deji Elumoye, Chuks Okocha, Emmanuel Addeh in Abuja, Sunday Ehigiator and Wale Igbintade in Lagos
The presidency has reacted to Tuesday’s ruling by a United States court ordering the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to release reports on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, saying there is nothing new to be revealed.
The presidency, which claimed Tinubu’s lawyers were already studying the ruling, stated that the over 30-year-old reports being linked to the president never indicted him.
Presidential spokesperson, Bayo Onanuga, in his post on X, @aonanuga1956, said, “Journalists have sought the Presidency’s reaction to the ruling last Tuesday by a Washington DC judge ordering the US FBI and DEA to release reports connected with President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
“Our response is as follows: There is nothing new to be revealed. The report by Agent Moss of the FBI and the DEA report have been in the public space for more than 30 years. The reports did not indict the Nigerian leader. The lawyers are examining the ruling.”
A federal judge of the Court for the District of Columbia, Beryl Howell, recently ordered FBI and DEA to release records of their investigations on the alleged involvement of Tinubu in drug trafficking.
Howell, on April 8, ruled that FBI and DEA’s refusal to confirm or deny the existence of such documents was “neither logical nor plausible,” especially since Tinubu’s name was already acknowledged in prior investigations.
The order followed a 2023 lawsuit filed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by American activist, Aaron Greenspan.
He had requested documents from six U.S. agencies, including FBI, IRS, DEA, CIA, and State Department, regarding an alleged probe into a Chicago heroin ring from the early ‘90s.
Greenspan’s FOIA requests sought records on Tinubu and three others allegedly tied to the case, including Abiodun Agbele.
All agencies initially issued “Glomar responses,” refusing to confirm or deny the existence of related files, a response the court had now rejected for some agencies.
The case gained attention after it was revealed that Tinubu had previously forfeited $460,000 to the U.S. government in 1993 over funds allegedly linked to narcotics trafficking.
That forfeiture resurfaced during the 2023 presidential election petitions in Nigeria but was dismissed by the courts, affirming Tinubu’s eligibility.
Tinubu later tried to intervene in the U.S. case, citing privacy over tax and law enforcement records. But the court had now ruled that at least some information must be released.
The case is still unfolding, with broader implications for transparency and international accountability. However, Howell held that the “Glomar responses” issued to FOIA requests must be lifted.
