![\"FBI\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/africa\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/HQMA88TXsAE4w4J.jpg\")
\n<\/p>\nThe United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has asked a federal court in Washington, D.C., for permission to submit confidential declarations under seal and privately explain the basis for withholding records relating to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.<\/p>\n
The request was contained in a four-page motion filed on August 20, 2026, in the case of Aaron Greenspan v. Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, et al., Civil Action No. 23-1816 (BAH), before U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell.<\/p>\n
The FBI is seeking leave to submit the declarations \u201cex parte\u201d and \u201cin camera\u201d in support of the U.S. government’s motion for summary judgment in the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case.<\/p>\n
The records being sought include Tinubu’s FBI file and interview records from the 1990s.<\/p>\n
According to the filing, one FOIA request, identified as Request Number 1588244-000, sought \u201cthe entire FBI file for Bola Ahmed Tinubu, DOB 3\/29\/1952, President-Elect of Nigeria as of February 2023.\u201d<\/p>\n
A second request, numbered 1593615-000, sought \u201cFBI 302 interviews with Bola Tinubu from FBI Case No. 245-IP-71386-UUUUUU during the timeframe 1992-1993.\u201d<\/p>\n
The FBI said it had relied on several FOIA exemptions, including Exemptions 6, 7(C), 7(D), 7(E) and 7(F), in withholding information from the records.<\/p>\n
The agency said releasing the withheld information could reveal law enforcement techniques and procedures and \u201ccould reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual.\u201d<\/p>\n
The FBI said it could not disclose the full basis for its reliance on Exemptions 7(E) and 7(F) on the public record.<\/p>\n
\n<\/p>\n
\u201cThe FBI has determined that it cannot provide on the public record the full basis for the application of Exemptions 7(E) and 7(F) to certain withholdings and that, therefore, an ex parte, under seal declaration is necessary,\u201d the motion stated.<\/p>\n
The agency argued that the court has the authority to privately examine the information as part of its consideration of the government’s motion for summary judgment.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe Court has inherent authority to examine this information as part of Defendants’ renewed motion for summary judgment,\u201d the FBI stated, citing previous decisions involving the private review of sensitive government material.<\/p>\n
FBI Plans Two Confidential Declarations<\/p>\n
The FBI said that, if granted permission, it expected to submit the declarations to the court by August 28.<\/p>\n
\u201cAs currently contemplated, there will be two ex parte, in camera declarations, one of which will be attached as an exhibit to the other declaration,\u201d the filing stated.<\/p>\n
The FBI also disclosed that the plaintiff, Aaron Greenspan, opposed the request.<\/p>\n
\u201cPursuant to Local Rule 7(m), the undersigned counsel has conferred with Plaintiff regarding the relief requested in this motion on August 19, 2026 and Plaintiff has advised that he opposes the relief requested herein,\u201d the filing stated.<\/p>\n
![\"FBI\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/africa\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/HQMA88UXMAAZTFN.jpg\")
\n<\/p>\n
The motion was submitted on behalf of the United States by lawyers including U.S. Attorney Jeanine Ferris Pirro and Assistant U.S. Attorney Samantha-Josephine Baker.<\/p>\n
Attached to the filing is a proposed order for Judge Howell.<\/p>\n
The proposed order states that, upon consideration of the FBI’s motion and \u201cfor good cause shown,\u201d the request would be granted.<\/p>\n
It further provides that the FBI would be permitted to submit the declarations \u201cunder seal, ex parte, for the Court’s in camera review in connection with its motion for summary judgment.\u201d<\/p>\n
The document supplied does not establish that the proposed order had been signed by Judge Howell at the time of filing.<\/p>\n
Records Linked To 1990s Investigation<\/p>\n
The FOIA requests are part of a long-running legal battle over the release of U.S. government records concerning investigations involving Tinubu.<\/p>\n
SaharaReporters reported on August 18 that Tinubu had formally joined the U.S. Department of Justice’s request for a 10-day extension to respond to the motion for summary judgment in the case.<\/p>\n
In a notice filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Tinubu’s lawyers stated:<\/p>\n
\u201cIntervenor joins Defendants’ motion for a 10-day extension of time to file response to the motion for summary judgment (DE 92), in as much as Intervenor requests that the responses remain on the same schedule.\u201d<\/p>\n
The extension request was subsequently denied by Judge Howell, according to the report, with the judge allowing a shorter extension.<\/p>\n
The case has been pending for more than three years and involves requests for records held by U.S. government agencies concerning Tinubu.<\/p>\n
![\"FBI\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/africa\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/HQMA88SXUAA182Y.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
The records have attracted particular attention because of their connection to a 1990s U.S. investigation into a Chicago-based heroin trafficking network and the forfeiture of $460,000 held in an account in Tinubu’s name.<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
According to U.S. court documents and affidavits previously reported by SaharaReporters, the U.S. government investigated a narcotics network operated by Chicago-based drug figures Adegboyega Mueez Akande and Abiodun Agbele, which trafficked heroin into Illinois between 1988 and 1991.<\/p>\n
IRS Special Agent Kevin Moss reportedly established that funds generated by the drug operation were deposited into several U.S. bank accounts opened and controlled by Tinubu.<\/p>\n
U.S. authorities obtained a court order in January 1992 freezing more than $1.4 million in accounts linked to Tinubu.<\/p>\n
In October 1993, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois ordered the forfeiture of $460,000 held in an account in Tinubu’s name.<\/p>\n
The court order stated that the funds represented proceeds of narcotics trafficking or were involved in financial transactions violating U.S. money-laundering laws.<\/p>\n
![\"FBI\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/africa\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/HQMA8-CXgAANrfk.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
Tinubu has consistently denied wrongdoing and rejected allegations linking him to drug trafficking.<\/p>\n
His lawyers have maintained that the case was an in rem civil forfeiture proceeding, meaning that the action was brought against the money rather than Tinubu personally.<\/p>\n
They have also argued that Tinubu was never arrested, indicted, arraigned or criminally convicted of a drug offence in the United States.<\/p>\n
The latest FBI filing does not itself establish that Tinubu committed a drug-trafficking offence. It concerns the agency’s request to privately provide the court with additional justification for withholding certain records under FOIA exemptions.<\/p>\n
The development nevertheless raises fresh questions over what information the U.S. government believes is sufficiently sensitive to warrant confidential judicial review in a case involving records about the Nigerian president.<\/p>\n
The application was published on X by Von Batten-Montague-York, a Washington-based lobbying firm that was hired by former Nigerian Vice-President and African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar ahead of the 2027 Nigerian presidential election.<\/p>\n
The case comes amid renewed political scrutiny of Tinubu’s past as the 2027 presidential election approaches, with Tinubu seeking re-election and former Vice President Atiku among those expected to challenge him.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has asked a federal court in Washington, D.C., for permission…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":389764,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_share_on_mastodon":"0"},"categories":[45],"tags":[63,302,83,3109,243,3110,5223,122,261,264],"class_list":["post-389763","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-nigeria","tag-africa","tag-breaking-news","tag-business","tag-corruption","tag-entertainment","tag-government","tag-investigative-reporting","tag-nigeria","tag-politics","tag-sports"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/africa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/389763","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/africa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/africa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/africa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/africa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=389763"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/africa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/389763\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/africa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/389764"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/africa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=389763"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/africa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=389763"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/africa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=389763"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}