A legal counsel to President Bola Tinubu, Wole Afolabi, SAN, has explained why the Nigerian president is challenging the release of records held by United States law enforcement agencies in connection with historical investigations involving him.
Afolabi said the legal challenge was within Tinubu’s rights under US law, arguing that allegations against the President were speculative and that the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) should not be used to obtain personal information about political candidates.
He disclosed this during an interview with Channels Television monitored by ***TRIBUNE ONLINE ***on Sunday.
“I don’t know what’s in the documents. At page 24 of the government’s filing, they actually submitted their motion ex parte before the judge. Their concern is about protecting the safety of FBI agents.
“The allegations made against Tinubu are speculative. And speculations are not covered by the Freedom of Information Act. You must have your facts.
“Freedom of Information Act is primarily directed at government agencies, is not a tool to pull information about opposition or candidate.
“Basically, what we are doing is, we are staying within the confines of the law and we advised our client (Tinubu) to do so, it is what the laws avail him.”
The development is part of a long-running legal battle in the United States over records relating to historical investigations involving Tinubu.
American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against several US government agencies, including the Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation and Drug Enforcement Administration, seeking access to records connected to investigations involving the Nigerian President.
The case, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, seeks records including FBI files and interview records relating to investigations from the early 1990s. The documents have been linked to allegations surrounding a 1993 civil forfeiture proceeding involving about $460,000. Tinubu has denied wrongdoing in connection with the allegations.
The legal dispute intensified after the FBI indicated that it possessed records responsive to the FOIA request. The bureau subsequently asked the court to allow it to submit some information privately, arguing that disclosure of portions of the records could expose law-enforcement techniques and potentially endanger individuals.
A US judge later allowed the FBI to submit sensitive material for private review, with the records to be examined by the court without being made public at that stage.
Against this backdrop, Tinubu’s legal team recently filed a 16-page submission asking the court to reject the request for the release of the records and uphold the redactions and withholdings made by the FBI and DEA.
Tinubu’s lawyers argued that the records are protected by privacy provisions under the US FOIA and Privacy Act. They also maintained that the public’s interest in Tinubu’s political career or fitness for office does not, in itself, constitute the type of public interest recognised under FOIA.
The legal team further argued that FOIA is intended primarily to promote transparency about the activities of government agencies, rather than provide access to private information about individuals contained in government files.
The FBI has separately raised security concerns over the possible disclosure of some of the records, saying the release could expose individuals connected to the investigation to retaliation or physical danger.
Tinubu’s latest legal challenge therefore seeks to prevent the public release of the disputed records while the US court considers the competing arguments over transparency, privacy and the protection of sensitive law-enforcement information.
Follow the story
