President Bola Tinubu has asked a United States federal court to stop the release of government records relating to past investigations allegedly connected to him, arguing that their disclosure would infringe on his privacy rights.
Tinubu’s lawyers intervened in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed by American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan against the US Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
Greenspan is seeking access to records concerning investigations involving Tinubu, including FBI files and Form 302 interview records covering the period between 1992 and 1993.
The request also covers records relating to a 1993 civil forfeiture case in the US involving about $460,000 allegedly linked to Tinubu.
Tinubu has consistently denied wrongdoing in connection with the allegations.
In a 16-page filing submitted on Friday, August 28, the president’s lawyers, Christopher W. Carmichael, Victor P. Henderson and Oluwole O. Afolabi, urged the court to reject Greenspan’s bid to compel the release of the records.
The legal team argued that information previously disclosed during the forfeiture proceedings did not amount to a public release of details concerning any potential criminal investigation involving Tinubu or its outcome.
According to the lawyers, Greenspan was seeking information contained in investigative files that had not previously been made public, giving Tinubu a continuing privacy interest in the records.
“Regardless of the prior disclosure in the forfeiture proceeding, Intervenor retains a privacy interest in potential disclosure of the investigative files sought by Plaintiff,” the lawyers argued.
They relied on previous rulings by the US Supreme Court and other federal courts to contend that a person’s privacy interest in government investigative records does not automatically disappear merely because some information from those records has entered the public domain.
The lawyers cited the Supreme Court’s decision in Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, arguing that privacy protections could still apply to information contained in government files even where isolated or “scattered” details had previously been disclosed.
They also referenced Judicial Watch, Inc. v. United States Department of Justice and Electronic Privacy Information Center v. United States Department of Justice, maintaining that public association with an investigation does not necessarily eliminate an individual’s privacy interest in undisclosed government records.
Tinubu’s legal team further challenged Greenspan’s arguments concerning the FBI’s search for documents, the DEA’s Vaughn Index, document segregation and the application of exemptions under the FOIA and Privacy Act.
The lawyers argued that Greenspan’s filings indicated that his primary objective was to obtain government documents containing Tinubu’s name.
They maintained that such a request could not override statutory provisions permitting US agencies to withhold or redact information where disclosure would violate protected privacy interests.
“If this Court finds that Plaintiff cannot use FOIA to mine information in government files about a private individual, he should not be able to access documents with Intervenor’s ‘name on them’,” the filing stated.
Tinubu’s lawyers therefore asked the court to dismiss Greenspan’s motion for summary judgment and uphold the FBI and DEA’s decisions to withhold or redact the records.
The intervention represents the latest development in Greenspan’s long-running effort to obtain US government documents concerning Tinubu and alleged investigations dating back to the 1990s.
Tinubu has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing over the allegations surrounding the forfeited funds and claims of drug trafficking.
Leave a Reply