(FBI) &(DEA) to release investigative documents concerning Tinubu

A federal judge in the United States has mandated the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to release investigative documents concerning Nigerian President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, associated with an alleged narcotics trafficking investigation from the 1990s.

As reported by PREMIUM TIMES, Judge Beryl Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued the ruling on Tuesday, dismissing the agencies' claims to withhold the materials based on the "Glomar response" — a legal tactic permitting agencies to neither confirm nor deny the existence of specific records.

"The assertion that Glomar responses were essential to safeguard this information from public knowledge is neither logical nor credible at this stage," Judge Howell commented, affirming that the FBI and DEA had not satisfactorily justified their refusals under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The case was brought forth by Aaron Greenspan, an advocate for transparency and founder of PlainSite.org, who filed a lawsuit in June 2023 after submitting 12 FOIA requests to various U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies. These requests aimed to uncover details about a federal probe into a heroin trafficking network allegedly involving Tinubu along with individuals such as Abiodun Agbele, Mueez Akande, and Lee Andrew Edwards.

Previously, the FBI, DEA, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Department of State, Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys (EOUSA), and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) denied Greenspan's FOIA requests, citing Glomar responses. In his lawsuit, Greenspan contended that the agencies had wrongfully withheld information of considerable public interest. He referenced a verified complaint from the U.S.

Department of Justice in 1993, which sought the forfeiture of $460,000 connected to Bola Tinubu, alleging that the funds were the proceeds of drug trafficking. Included in the court filings was an affidavit from Kevin Moss, a former IRS Special Agent, detailing a heroin ring operating in Chicago, which implicated Tinubu in financial transactions believed to launder proceeds from drug trafficking. "There is probable cause to believe that funds in certain bank accounts controlled by Bola Tinubu were involved in financial transactions in violation of U.S. laws and are proceeds of drug trafficking," Moss stated in his affidavit. The same document also linked Tinubu with Mueez Akande and Abiodun Agbele, mentioning that Agbele, who was arrested after selling heroin to an undercover DEA agent, cooperated with investigators and disclosed further connections within the network.

Following the FOIA lawsuit, President Tinubu intervened in October 2023, raising concerns over privacy issues and opposing the release of "confidential tax records" and "documents from federal law enforcement agencies." Nevertheless, Judge Howell concluded that the public's interest in understanding the records surrounding Tinubu's alleged involvement surpassed the purported privacy concerns. "The public's interest in learning about a sitting president's potential connection to a significant drug investigation is undeniably substantial," the judge ruled. While the CIA successfully defended its use of the Glomar response, with the court determining that Greenspan did not demonstrate that the agency had officially acknowledged the existence or nonexistence of relevant records, Judge Howell ordered all other agencies, excluding the CIA, to jointly submit a report by May 2 regarding the status of unresolved matters in the case. Legal experts believe this ruling could lead to the release of sensitive documents that have long fueled speculation and political controversy in Nigeria. The forfeiture of the $460,000 in 1993 resurfaced during the 2023 Nigerian presidential elections, as challenges to Tinubu's eligibility were raised by his opponents; however, these issues were ultimately dismissed by Nigeria's election tribunal. In response to the U.S. court's ruling, Greenspan emphasized in a statement, "Transparency must prevail over secrecy when it comes to public officials. The American public, as well as Nigerians, deserve to know the truth." Background: In November 2024, SaharaReporters noted that U.S. law enforcement agencies had invoked the Glomar response in response to requests for criminal investigative documents concerning President Tinubu and others, following numerous FOIA requests submitted by Plaintiff Aaron Greenspan to the FBI, CIA, DEA, Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, Department of State, and Department of Treasury (IRS). The case in the District of Columbia, assigned the number 1:23-cv-01816-BAH, pertains to Greenspan versus the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys and others. The requests focused on criminal investigative documents related to third parties, including Tinubu, Lee Andrew Edwards, Mueez Akande, and Agbele, who Greenspan alleged participated in "an international drug trafficking and money laundering ring with operations in Chicago, Illinois." The agencies contended that disclosing information regarding Nigerian President Bola Tinubu could "compromise U.S. national security," as noted in a memorandum filed by the CIA, FBI, and DEA with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. In 2023, the court declined a request seeking to expedite the release of confidential information regarding President Tinubu from leading U.S. law enforcement agencies. The three agencies subsequently filed their defense against a summary judgment concerning investigation records on President Bola Tinubu.

The CIA further justified its Glomar response by stating, "the CIA does not disclose the identity of its human sources [because] acknowledging their relationship could jeopardize Agency methods, other confidential sources, and specific intelligence operations." Mary C. Williams, the CIA's Litigation Information Review Officer, elaborated that human sources typically provide information to the CIA only under the assurance that their cooperation will remain confidential, as confirming such cooperation could expose them and their families to retaliation, thus jeopardizing the integrity of the agency's broader intelligence efforts. The ongoing disputes reflected in the court documents involve the Defendants' Glomar responses to requests for records regarding Tinubu and the DEA's similar response concerning records related to Agbele. The plaintiff also took legal action against the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, the Department of State, and the Department of Treasury (IRS), but voluntarily dismissed those defendants on August 13, 2024. The term "Glomar response" originated from a FOIA case involving the Klomar vessel, the Hughes Glomar Explorer, where the CIA declined to confirm or deny its association over national security concerns. According to the court document, Glomar responses are appropriate if the existence or lack of records falls under a FOIA exemption. The FBI and DEA rightly asserted Glomar responses under FOIA Exemptions 6 and 7(C), as the requests sought criminal investigative documents related to third parties which, if they existed, could infringe on substantial privacy interests related to law enforcement records.

On September 6, 2023, SaharaReporters reported that the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal in Abuja dismissed several paragraphs from Atiku Abubakar's petition, which aimed to challenge President Tinubu's position, ruling that they lacked the requisite support to stand. Justice Moses Ugoh ruled that vital facts needed to substantiate Atiku's petition were insufficiently provided, a determination also applied to a petition from his counterpart in the Labour Party, Peter Obi. SaharaReporters.com stands as a pioneering news platform, encouraging citizen journalists to expose ongoing corruption and government misconduct across Africa, dynamically utilizing photos, text, and video to inform and mobilize concerned citizens and activists worldwide in denunciating official corruption and advocating for democratic principles enshrined in constitutional law.