Sunday, August 30, 2026 - President Bola Tinubu has asked a US court to block the release of records held by the US Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) relating to allegations of drug trafficking.
The records are being sought by American transparency
activist Aaron Greenspan, who filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit
against several US government agencies seeking documents relating to
investigations involving Tinubu.
Greenspan’s requests include the FBI’s entire file on Tinubu
and FBI Form 302 interview records concerning the period between 1992 and 1993.
The case also involves records allegedly connected to a 1993 civil forfeiture
proceeding in the United States involving about $460,000 linked to Tinubu.
Tinubu has denied wrongdoing.
According to 16-page court documents filed by his legal
team, Christopher W. Carmichael, Victor P. Henderson and Oluwole O. Afolabi,
Tinubu argued that releasing the records could infringe on his privacy rights.
The legal team argued that the records sought by Greenspan contain information
that is not already part of the public record.
“Submitted in that proceeding, did not reveal the details of
a possible criminal investigation (or its results) involving Intervenor. Other
than by speculation or labels, Plaintiff does not point to an existing public
record that contains details of a governmental criminal investigation or
findings about Intervenor,” the filing said.
The lawyers argued that previous disclosures connected to
the forfeiture proceeding did not eliminate Tinubu’s privacy interests in the
broader investigative files. “The purpose of Plaintiff’s motion is to obtain
such information because it is not public,” the filing said.
The legal team also cited a US Supreme Court precedent to
argue that a person can retain privacy interests in an entire government file
even when some information from the same file has previously been disclosed.
“While some information may appear in portions of public records, an individual
still retains a privacy interest in the details that remain undisclosed,” the
lawyers argued.
They further cited previous court decisions involving
government investigative records, arguing that being publicly associated with
an investigation does not remove an individual’s privacy rights over the
contents of the investigative files.
“Although the names of Trump campaign officials appear in
public portions of the Report, they retain a privacy interest in ‘avoiding
disclosure of the details of the investigation,’” the filing quoted an earlier
court decision as saying. Regardless of the prior disclosure in the forfeiture
proceeding, Intervenor retains a privacy interest in potential disclosure of
the investigative files sought by Plaintiff,” Tinubu’s lawyers argued.
The legal team also challenged Greenspan’s attempts to obtain records
through FOIA, arguing that his filings showed a particular focus on documents
containing Tinubu’s name. “Plaintiff’s filings, overwhelmingly, demonstrate
that his singular focus is obtaining documents with Intervenor’s ‘name on
them,’” the filing said.
The lawyers argued that such a focus should not allow Greenspan to obtain
documents that are otherwise protected from disclosure under FOIA exemptions or
the Privacy Act. “If this Court finds that Plaintiff cannot use FOIA to mine
information in government files about a private individual, he should not be
able to access documents with Intervenor’s ‘name on them,’” they argued
0 Comments