A long-running legal battle in the United States over government records linked to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has entered a new phase.
A fresh document exclusively obtained by Spear News Nigeria has shown that American transparency advocate Aaron Greenspan is intensifying efforts to compel the release of additional documents held by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
The case, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), has drawn international attention because it concerns historical law enforcement records connected to investigations dating back more than three decades.
The lawsuit, formally known as Greenspan v. Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys et al., seeks access to records that Greenspan argues should be disclosed to the public in the interest of transparency and accountability. Tinubu 6 gov.uscourts.pdf
Spear News Nigeria reports that a recent court filings submitted by Greenspan contend that U.S. agencies have not fully complied with their obligations under federal disclosure laws and continue to withhold or heavily redact records related to Tinubu and several other individuals associated with historical investigations.
The plaintiff argues that many of the facts surrounding the matter have already entered the public domain through earlier court proceedings and government filings, thereby reducing the justification for continued secrecy.
At the centre of the dispute is a 1993 civil forfeiture case filed by the United States government in Illinois. According to court documents referenced by Greenspan, that case incorporated an affidavit prepared by IRS Special Agent Kevin Moss, which described a joint FBI, DEA and Internal Revenue Service investigation. Greenspan’s filings argue that the affidavit identified Tinubu as being connected to bank accounts that became subjects of forfeiture proceedings and that the government itself publicly disclosed the existence of the investigation through court filings made at the time. Tinubu 1 gov.uscourts.pdf
The plaintiff maintains that because these records were publicly filed decades ago, U.S. law enforcement agencies should not continue to invoke privacy protections or other exemptions to withhold related materials from disclosure.
He further argues that public interest considerations have increased significantly since Tinubu became President of Nigeria in 2023. In various filings before the court, Greenspan contends that the Nigerian leader’s position as the head of Africa’s most populous nation strengthens the case for greater transparency regarding historical records held by U.S. authorities. Tinubu 3 gov.uscourts.pdf
The FBI and DEA, however, have defended aspects of their handling of the requests and have sought summary judgment in their favour. Greenspan’s latest submissions challenge both the adequacy of agency searches and the legal basis for certain redactions and withholdings.
He argues that the FBI’s search methodology raises unresolved questions and that additional records may exist beyond those already produced. Tinubu 2 gov.uscourts.pdf
Among the documents filed in September 2026 are proposed orders drafted by the plaintiff asking the court to direct the agencies to release additional records and remove specific privacy-based redactions.
The proposed orders request that records relating to Tinubu, Abiodun Agbele, Mueez Adegboyega Akande, Lee Andrew Edwards and other related subjects be disclosed without certain exemptions currently being asserted by the government. Tinubu 5 gov.uscourts.pdf
Legal observers note, however, that these proposed orders do not constitute court decisions. They represent the plaintiff’s preferred outcome and remain subject to judicial review and determination by the presiding judge. The court has not adopted the proposals, and the litigation remains ongoing.
The latest filings also reveal a separate controversy involving repeated cyberattacks on PlainSite, the legal transparency platform operated by Greenspan.
In a motion filed before the court, the plaintiff alleges that his website was subjected to significant distributed denial-of-service attacks over an extended period, particularly around major developments in the litigation.
Greenspan sought permission from the court to conduct limited discovery to determine whether any individuals connected to the case possessed information about the attacks. Tinubu 6 gov.uscourts.pdf
Importantly, the filing explicitly states that Greenspan was not asking the court to find that Tinubu was responsible for the cyberattacks and was not alleging that he personally carried them out. Instead, the plaintiff sought authority to ask a limited number of questions aimed at establishing whether anyone involved in the broader matter had relevant knowledge of the incidents. Tinubu 6 gov.uscourts.pdf
For years now, the wider controversy over Tinubu’s past dealings with U.S. authorities has continued to spark public debate both in Nigeria and around the world.
Supporters of the Nigerian President have consistently argued that previous legal and political issues concerning the matter have been addressed and that no criminal conviction has ever been secured against him in the United States. Critics, meanwhile, continue to call for fuller disclosure of government records, arguing that transparency is essential given Tinubu’s status as a sitting head of state.
The current FOIA litigation is not a criminal proceeding and does not seek to determine criminal liability. Rather, it focuses on whether federal agencies have properly complied with American public records laws and whether additional documents should be released to the public. The case therefore centres on access to information rather than adjudication of guilt or innocence.
Discussion about this post