By Spear News Nigeria
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar’s move to capitalize on the FBI case on President Bola Tinubu ahead of the 2027 presidential election may have been effectively neutralised, as the agency has invoked FOIA exemptions 7(E) and 7(F) and sought a sealed court declaration, which keeps the records out of public reach and denies the opposition the political ammunition it had hoped to wield against the President.
In an application filed on August 20 before the US District Court for the District of Columbia, the FBI requested permission to submit an ex parte, in camera declaration – a private submission meant for the judge’s eyes only – to explain why certain information cannot be disclosed to the public.
The agency cited Exemption 7(E), which protects law enforcement investigative techniques and procedures from exposure, and Exemption 7(F), which shields information that could reasonably be expected to endanger the lives or physical safety of individuals.
The FBI cannot publicly disclose the full basis for invoking these exemptions, the application read, adding that revealing the withheld details could compromise ongoing or future investigations and potentially put persons at risk.
The records in question stem from two Freedom of Information Act requests filed by Aaron Greenspan, founder of PlainSite, a transparency advocacy group.
The first request sought the entire FBI file on Tinubu, identified at the time as Nigeria’s president-elect in February 2023. The second request specifically sought FBI Form 302 interview records involving Tinubu from FBI Case No. 245-IP-71386-UUUUUU, dating back to 1992 and 1993 – a period linked to a Chicago heroin trafficking investigation.
The latest FBI move follows a ruling in April 2025 by US District Judge Beryl Howell, who struck down the FBI and DEA’s initial “Glomar” responses – refusals to even confirm or deny the existence of records.
Judge Howell held that the agencies had failed to establish a legally recognisable privacy interest in keeping secret the fact that Tinubu had been a subject of a criminal investigation. She ordered the agencies to reconsider their stance.
The Department of Justice subsequently sought a 10-day extension to comply, but Howell granted only four days, moving the deadline to August 21. President Tinubu’s legal team later joined the DOJ’s extension request, but the judge reportedly declined the broader timeline.
Exemption 7(E) protects law enforcement investigative techniques, procedures, and guidelines from disclosure that could circumvent the law, while Exemption 7(F) shields information that could reasonably threaten the physical safety of any individual, including witnesses, agents, or subjects.
The FBI argued that even confirming which investigative methods were used could allow future subjects to evade detection, while releasing certain names or operational details could endanger lives.
The case has reignited political tensions in Nigeria, with opposition figures – including Atiku Abubakar’s camp – seizing on the FBI’s continued secrecy as evidence of a deeper cover-up.
The Washington-based lobbying firm Von Batten-Montague-York, recently engaged by the African Democratic Congress presidential candidate, published the FBI’s latest application on X, fueling public discourse.
Presidential spokesperson Bayo Onanuga has yet to issue an official response to the FBI’s latest filing, though the presidency has previously dismissed the allegations as recycled political distractions.
The FBI has indicated that, if granted permission by the court, it will file the confidential declaration before August 28. The judge’s decision on whether to allow the sealed submission could shape the final outcome of Greenspan’s lawsuit and determine just how much of Tinubu’s purported investigative file ever sees the light of day. For now, the American public – and Nigerians watching closely – remain in the dark about the full scope of what the FBI knows, and why it insists on keeping those secrets locked away.
Discussion about this post