A fresh controversy has emerged over the ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation involving President Bola Tinubu’s records in the United States (US), with Paul Ibe, media adviser to former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, accusing the Presidency of avoiding the central issues raised by the case.
In a statement shared on social media on Friday, Ibe argued that the Presidency’s latest response to the litigation failed to address concerns about the contents of records held by the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
According to him, the debate is not about whether the FOIA proceedings amount to a criminal trial but about the information contained in the records and the Presidency’s efforts to limit their disclosure.
“The Presidency’s latest statement on the Tinubu Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case is a classic exercise in answering questions nobody asked while avoiding the questions Nigerians are actually asking,” Ibe said.
He continued: “Nobody says the FOIA litigation is itself a criminal trial. The issue is what the FBI and DEA records contain and why the Presidency is so invested in preventing their full disclosure.”
Ibe noted that the Presidency had acknowledged that the FBI and DEA produced 399 pages of records, some of which were released with redactions.
He further claimed that the Presidency confirmed President Tinubu had personally participated in the legal proceedings through his lawyers by invoking privacy protections to oppose the release of additional documents.
“It also confirms that President Tinubu has personally intervened in the case and, through his lawyers, invoked privacy protections to resist disclosure. Those are facts—not speculation,” he stated.
Addressing the Presidency’s reliance on a 2003 letter from the US Consulate, which reportedly indicated that an FBI records check found no arrest records, outstanding warrants or criminal wants against Tinubu at the time, Ibe argued that such a document could not be interpreted as covering every possible investigation or government record.
“The Presidency repeatedly cites the 2003 US Consulate letter saying an FBI check found no arrest records, wants or warrants at that time. Moreover, the authenticity of that letter has been queried,” he said.
“But a 2003 records check cannot logically become a blanket certificate covering every investigation, record or proceeding that may have existed before or after that date.”
He also maintained that exemptions under the US Freedom of Information Act should not be interpreted as proof that allegations against Tinubu were false.
“Nor does a FOIA exemption mean that the underlying allegations are false.
“FOIA exemptions determine whether particular government information can legally be disclosed. They are not judicial findings that President Tinubu was never investigated or that every allegation concerning him is baseless.”
Ibe further claimed that the FBI had already submitted documents to the presiding judge for private review while legal arguments over additional disclosure remain pending.
He also questioned why the Presidency had focused attention on individuals seeking access to the records rather than the documents themselves.
“And why is the Presidency spending so much energy attacking Aaron Greenspan, Atiku Abubakar and Karl Von Batten?
“The identity or political affiliation of the person seeking disclosure does not determine what is inside an FBI or DEA file.
“The documents—not the messenger—are the issue.”
Calling for greater openness, Ibe insisted that Nigerians have a right to know whatever information the court eventually authorises for public release.
“Nigerians are entitled to transparency concerning matters that have generated serious questions about the person occupying the highest office in the land.
“The Presidency cannot simultaneously say, ‘there is nothing to see,’ while asking that records concerning the matter remain protected from public scrutiny.”
He concluded by urging all parties to allow the judicial process to run its course while making any lawfully releasable records available to the public.
“Let us therefore stop the political distractions.
“And, above all, let Nigerians see whatever the court determines can lawfully be made public.
“This is not about Atiku. It is not about Von Batten. It is not about Aaron Greenspan.
“It is about transparency, accountability and the right of Nigerians to know.”
The Presidency has consistently maintained that the ongoing FOIA litigation in the United States does not amount to a criminal proceeding against President Tinubu and has defended its position in the case. The legal process over the disclosure of additional records remains before the US court.