By Staff Reporter
American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan has renewed his legal push in the United States to obtain more records relating to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
Greenspan made the latest major filings on September 9, 2026, before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, as part of his Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against several US government agencies.
The case, Greenspan v. Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01816-BAH, is being handled by US District Judge Beryl A. Howell.
In the September 9 filings, Greenspan asked the court to compel the FBI, DEA and Executive Office for US Attorneys to release additional records and challenged the agencies’ reliance on privacy and other FOIA exemptions.
His filings included a reply and opposition memorandum, an amended statement of material facts, a statement of genuine issues, a supplemental declaration containing 14 exhibits and a proposed order.
What Greenspan Is Seeking
Greenspan is seeking access to historical US law-enforcement records concerning investigations from the late 1980s and early 1990s involving Tinubu, Nigerian businessman Abiodun Agbele and other individuals.
He argues that records already disclosed by US authorities establish that Tinubu was connected to the historical investigation and that additional records should therefore be released where they are not legally exempt.
Greenspan has also challenged the extent of redactions made by the agencies, arguing that information already officially acknowledged should not continue to be withheld.
The case is particularly focused on records held by the FBI and DEA following earlier court proceedings over the agencies’ refusal to confirm or deny the existence of responsive records.
Fresh Government Filing
The dispute moved into another phase on September 23, 2026, when the US government filed a response defending the DEA’s decision to withhold portions of the records sought by Greenspan.
According to the filing, the DEA maintained that some withheld information could identify confidential sources, expose non-public investigative techniques or reveal other sensitive law-enforcement information.
The FBI also disclosed that it searched a multi-subject file using the terms “Bola” and “Tinubu” separately while processing one of Greenspan’s FOIA requests. The disclosure was contained in the September 23 filing.
The government relied on FOIA exemptions to justify withholding or redacting portions of the investigative material.
The 1993 Forfeiture Case
A major part of Greenspan’s argument concerns a 1993 civil forfeiture proceeding in the United States involving approximately $460,000 held in an account associated with Tinubu.
Greenspan’s filings cite court records relating to the forfeiture proceeding and argue that the historical documents provide a basis for releasing additional records.
However, the forfeiture proceeding was a civil case and the existence of that proceeding does not by itself establish a criminal conviction against Tinubu.
What the Court Has and Has Not Established
The ongoing litigation is a FOIA records-disclosure case, rather than a criminal prosecution of Tinubu.
Reports on the court proceedings have noted that US court records establish that Tinubu was a subject of a historical investigation, but they do not establish that he was convicted of a drug-trafficking offence.
The Presidency has also repeatedly described the matter as a civil dispute over access to government records, rather than a criminal case against the Nigerian president.
The latest filings therefore centre on whether additional FBI and DEA records should be released and which portions can legally remain redacted under US FOIA exemptions.
As the case continues before Judge Howell, further rulings could determine whether additional historical records sought by Greenspan become available to the public.
