FBI Seeks US Court Approval to Seal Tinubu Drug Probe Records

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has formally petitioned a United States court, requesting authorization to submit a confidential declaration. This declaration aims to outline their justifications for withholding specific documents connected to allegations linking President Bola Tinubu to a past drug trafficking investigation. The FBI filed this application on August 20 with the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, asserting that a full public disclosure of their reasons for keeping certain information private is not feasible. An 'ex parte, in camera' declaration is a submission made privately to a judge for their consideration, without it being placed on the public record.

This application was brought to public attention via X (formerly Twitter) by Von Batten-Montague-York, a Washington-based lobbying firm recently engaged by former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar. The FBI indicated that it has applied various exemptions under the US Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to requests concerning records related to Tinubu from the period of 1992 to 1993. The agency asserted that making the withheld information public 'would, among other things, disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations and/or could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual.'

Part of the FBI's filing elaborated on specific requests. One such request, designated as Number 1588244-000, sought 'the entire FBI file for Bola Ahmed Tinubu, DOB 3/29/1952, President-Elect of Nigeria as of February 2023.' A second FOIA request, assigned Number 1593615-000, specifically asked for 'FBI 302 interviews with Bola Tinubu from FBI Case No. 245-IP-71386-UUUUUU during the timeframe 1992-1993.' In addressing these inquiries, the FBI cited several Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Exemptions, including 6, 7(C), 7(D), 7(E), and 7(F).

The bureau stated its inability to openly provide the complete justification for applying Exemptions 7(E) and 7(F) to certain withheld materials, thereby necessitating an ex parte, under seal declaration. Should the court approve their plea, the FBI committed to submitting this confidential declaration before August 28. The litigant in this matter is Aaron Greenspan, an American businessman and the founder of PlainSite.

This development comes on the heels of the US Department of Justice (DOJ) requesting an additional ten-day extension to comply with a court directive regarding the release of records connected to allegations against Tinubu. However, Judge Beryl Howell only granted a four-day extension, rescheduling the deadline to August 21. Subsequently, Tinubu, through his legal representatives, also supported the DOJ’s plea for the longer ten-day extension, a request which Judge Howell similarly denied.

Between 2022 and 2023, Greenspan initiated twelve Freedom of Information Act requests across six different US federal agencies. His aim was to obtain documents from investigations into a Chicago-based heroin syndicate active in the early 1990s. He specifically sought records concerning four individuals he alleged were linked to this drug ring: Bola Tinubu, Lee Andrew Edwards, Mueez Adegboyega Akande, and Abiodun Agbele. Five of these agencies responded by stating they could neither confirm nor deny the existence of the requested records. Unsatisfied with these outcomes, Greenspan then escalated the matter to the Department of Justice’s Office of Information Policy (OIP), which, according to court documents, affirmed the agencies' stance of refusing to confirm or deny the existence of the records.

On June 12, 2023, Greenspan filed a lawsuit, contesting the agencies' deployment of what is termed a 'Glomar response' to his FOIA requests. A Glomar response represents an official refusal by a US government agency to either confirm or deny the existence of requested records. Initially, the defendants in the lawsuit included the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, and the Department of State. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was later included as a defendant in the first amended complaint.

In April 2025, Judge Howell delivered a ruling declaring that the responses issued by the FBI and DEA were 'improper and must be lifted.' The judge determined that both agencies had not sufficiently established a privacy interest to justify keeping secret the fact that Tinubu was the subject of a criminal investigation. Furthermore, Howell concluded that the FBI and DEA had failed to present adequate evidence to uphold their Glomar responses.