Bola Tinubu has been accused of misleading a United States federal court over his political status in 1993 as his legal team seeks to prevent the further release of FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) records connected to historical investigations involving him.

The dispute is part of an ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed by American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan, who is seeking records relating to Tinubu, including FBI files and interview records covering the 1992–1993 period.

According to the material highlighted by Greenspan, Tinubu’s lawyers argued that he was a private individual in 1993 and was not a public official at the time. The argument forms part of their case that the records should remain redacted or withheld because their disclosure would infringe on Tinubu’s privacy rights.

FBI and Bola Tinubu
FBI and Bola Tinubu
Bola Tinubu lied to the US Court.

Apparently, his lawyer had argued that Tinubu was not involved in politics as of 1993 and had never held elected office.

This argument was made before the judge hearing the matter between Aaron Greenspan and the Joint Task Force that indicted… pic.twitter.com/yf1qnk5m5b

— Dejii™ (@_Dejii) September 28, 2026
Greenspan has challenged that position, pointing to historical records which he says contradict the description of Tinubu as a private individual with no elected political position in 1993. He has cited a contemporary Congressional Record reference that identified Tinubu as a senator, an issue that has become central to his challenge to the privacy argument.

The FOIA litigation concerns records sought from several US agencies in connection with investigations dating to the early 1990s. Greenspan’s requests include Tinubu’s FBI file, FBI Form 302 interview records from 1992 and 1993, and documents connected to a 1993 civil forfeiture proceeding involving approximately $460,000 associated with Tinubu.

The case does not amount to a new criminal prosecution of Tinubu. A US District Court judge previously ordered the FBI and DEA to search for and process non-exempt records responsive to Greenspan’s requests after the agencies had initially refused to confirm or deny whether they possessed records concerning Tinubu.

Tinubu later intervened in the case and asked the US District Court for the District of Columbia to reject Greenspan’s request for further disclosure. His lawyers argued that FOIA is intended to promote transparency about government activities and should not be used to obtain private information about individuals contained in law-enforcement files.

The legal team also relied on FOIA privacy exemptions and the US Privacy Act, arguing that the FBI and DEA were entitled to maintain existing redactions and withholdings. They maintained that the fact that some information had previously become public did not eliminate Tinubu’s privacy interests in the remaining contents of the investigative files.

The Presidency has separately maintained that the proceedings should not be portrayed as a criminal case against Tinubu, describing the litigation as a civil FOIA dispute over access to US government records. It has also maintained that the proceedings have produced no finding of criminal wrongdoing against him.