By Ajibola Olaide, JKNewsMedia Reporter
THE ONGOING United States (US) court battle over access to records relating to President Bola Tinubu remains a civil dispute under the Freedom of Information Act, with no criminal finding against the President, the Presidency has said.
JKNewsMedia.com reports that the clarification followed what it described as recent speculative reports concerning the case before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
The Presidency said the case began after Mr. Aaron Greenspan submitted FOIA requests to several United States government agencies in 2022 seeking records relating to Tinubu.
After some agencies withheld records or declined to confirm or deny their existence, Greenspan commenced Civil Action No. 23-1816 before the court in 2023.
However, the court later allowed Tinubu to participate in the proceedings as an intervenor.
During the proceedings, the defendants invoked the “Glomar defence”, which the Presidency described as a standard defence used by US law enforcement agencies when the government is not in a position to deny or admit the existence of an investigation.
The defence, it said, protects government personnel, techniques and sources used by law enforcement agencies to investigate and prosecute crimes.
Based on the defence, the court granted summary judgment in favour of the CIA, EOUSA, Department of State, Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service, removing them from the proceedings.
The remaining claims involving the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Drug Enforcement Administration were left 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 US law.
The plaintiff challenged the agencies’ decisions to redact parts of the documents, but the FBI and DEA, through the United States Department of Justice, opposed the request for unredacted records.
The agencies cited several exemptions under FOIA, including protections covering Grand Jury proceedings and information relating to certain court orders authorising or approving pen registers or trap and trace devices.
They also cited attorney work product and attorney client privileges, documents prepared for law enforcement purposes, protections against unwarranted invasions of personal privacy, and provisions protecting confidential sources and law enforcement techniques.
Tinubu, on the advice of his lawyers, has also asserted his rights under FOIA Exemption 7(C), the Presidency said.
The plaintiff has until September 11, 2026, to file any opposition and reply to the processes filed by the defendants and the intervenor.
Also, the FBI, DEA and the intervenor have until September 18, 2026, to respond to any processes filed by the plaintiff.
JKNewsMedia.com further reports that the Presidency also stressed that the release or withholding of records under FOIA does not by itself establish criminal liability, saying the dispute concerns access to government records and the application of statutory exemptions.
Moreover, it also said the outcome of the case rests with Judge Beryl A. Howell of the United States District Court, who will determine the matter based on the evidence, applicable law and arguments of the parties.
The Presidency further said recent commentary by Mr Karl von Batten had inaccurately portrayed him and his client as central to the proceedings, stressing that neither is a party to the case.
It urged the Nigerian media and the public to distinguish verified court proceedings from partisan speculation, reiterating that the litigation does not constitute a criminal charge, trial or judicial finding against Tinubu.
—
