President Bola Tinubu has asked a United States federal court to block the further release of records linked to past investigations involving him, arguing that disclosure would violate his privacy rights.
Tinubu, who joined the case as an intervenor, made the request in a fresh filing before the US District Court for the District of Columbia.
The President is urging the court to reject a motion for summary judgment filed by Aaron Greenspan, founder of PlainSite, and allow the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to retain redactions and withhold information from documents already released.
Greenspan had submitted Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests seeking records relating to Tinubu, including what he described as the “entire FBI file” on the Nigerian president and FBI interview records from 1992 to 1993.
The requests formed part of 12 FOIA applications submitted to six US federal agencies for investigative records connected to a Chicago heroin trafficking case from the early 1990s. Tinubu was among four individuals named in the requests.
In April 2025, US District Judge Beryl Howell ruled that the FBI and DEA had improperly refused to confirm or deny whether they held records relating to Tinubu.
The judge subsequently ordered the agencies to search for and process non-exempt documents responsive to Greenspan’s requests.
The agencies later released thousands of pages, although portions of the documents were redacted. They also provided a Vaughn index outlining the reasons for withholding specific information.
In his latest filing, Tinubu argued that FOIA was created to promote transparency about government operations and not to provide private information about individuals contained in government records.
“Plaintiff’s motion should be denied because FOIA is not a tool for obtaining information the government collected about private individuals,” his lawyers argued.
The President’s legal team contended that Greenspan’s requests were primarily aimed at obtaining personal information about Tinubu rather than examining how the FBI, DEA or other US agencies carried out their official duties.
His lawyers cited a 1989 US Supreme Court decision and invoked FOIA Exemption 7(C), which protects law-enforcement records where disclosure could constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
They also relied on provisions of the US Privacy Act, arguing that the FBI and DEA had acted properly in redacting or withholding exempt information.
President challenges Greenspan’s public-interest argument
Tinubu’s lawyers also rejected Greenspan’s claim that the records should be released because Tinubu is Nigeria’s president.
They argued that public curiosity about the President’s background, political career or suitability for office does not amount to the kind of public interest recognised under FOIA.
According to the legal team, Greenspan’s filings show that his primary objective is to obtain information about Tinubu rather than uncover possible misconduct by the FBI, DEA or other US government agencies.
The lawyers further dismissed claims of a secret prosecution or government cover-up as “unsubstantiated allegations”, arguing that Greenspan had not presented sufficient evidence of wrongdoing by the US government to warrant additional disclosure.
They also opposed Greenspan’s challenges to the agencies’ searches, the DEA’s Vaughn index, the exemptions claimed and the handling of information that could allegedly be separated and released.
Tinubu is therefore asking the court to dismiss Greenspan’s motion and allow the existing FBI and DEA redactions and withholdings to remain.
Greenspan filed the FOIA requests in 2022 and 2023, seeking records from the CIA, FBI, DEA, Internal Revenue Service, Executive Office for United States Attorneys and Department of State.
The requests centred on investigative records connected to the Chicago drug-trafficking case and named Tinubu alongside Lee Andrew Edwards, Mueez Abegboyega Akande and Abiodun Agbele.
Several agencies initially issued “Glomar” responses, meaning they declined to confirm or deny whether responsive records existed.
However, in her April 2025 ruling, Judge Howell held that the FBI and DEA had failed to establish sufficient privacy grounds to conceal the fact that Tinubu had been the subject of a criminal investigation.
She ordered the agencies to search for and process non-exempt records, while upholding the CIA’s Glomar response.
Tinubu has consistently denied wrongdoing in connection with the allegations.
