01/09/2026
FBI Confirms President Tinubu Was Subject of 1990s Drug-Trafficking Investigation in Sworn US Court Filing
By Adewale Omo Olubo I All Day TV
1 September 2027
The United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has confirmed in a sworn declaration filed before a US federal court that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu was the subject of a criminal investigation connected to drug-trafficking crimes in the early 1990s.
The declaration, dated August 28, 2026, was filed before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in an ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case seeking access to FBI records relating to Tinubu.
According to the FBI, the records being sought were compiled as part of an investigation involving multiple individuals for drug-trafficking crimes.
The agency stated in the court filing that “the responsive records herein were compiled in furtherance of the FBI’s investigation of multiple individuals for drug trafficking crimes.”
The FBI further noted that the court had already determined that there had been an official acknowledgement of an investigation involving Tinubu.
The latest filing has renewed public and political attention around decades-old US law-enforcement records concerning the Nigerian President, particularly as political parties and opposition figures position themselves ahead of Nigeria’s 2027 presidential election.
FBI, DEA Ordered to Process Records
The declaration followed an April 2025 ruling by US District Judge Beryl Howell, who held that the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) could no longer rely on so-called “Glomar” responses to refuse to confirm or deny the existence of records relating to the investigation.
A Glomar response is used by US government agencies in certain Freedom of Information Act cases when confirming or denying the existence of particular records could itself reveal protected information.
Judge Howell ruled that the agencies had not established sufficient privacy grounds to conceal the fact that Tinubu had been the subject of a criminal investigation.
She subsequently ordered the agencies to process records responsive to the FOIA requests, subject to applicable exemptions under US law.
However, the ruling did not establish that Tinubu committed a drug-trafficking offence, nor did it establish that he was convicted of any crime.
The distinction has become central to the latest political controversy, with the existence of an investigation being presented separately from any conclusion about criminal liability.
Records Sought in FOIA Case
The latest declaration relates to FOIA requests filed by American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan.
Among the documents sought by Greenspan were the “entire FBI file for Bola Ahmed Tinubu” as well as FBI Form 302 interview records involving Tinubu.
The records referenced FBI Case No. 245-IP-71386-UUUUUU, covering the period between 1992 and 1993.
Greenspan’s requests formed part of a broader effort to obtain records concerning a Chicago heroin-trafficking operation that operated during the early 1990s.
The FBI, however, has continued to withhold portions of the records, citing several exemptions under the US Freedom of Information Act.
According to the agency, the exemptions relate to issues including personal privacy, confidential sources, law-enforcement techniques and information whose disclosure could potentially endanger individuals.
The FBI also stated that it could not publicly disclose the complete basis for relying on some of the exemptions.
Atiku-Linked Lobbying Firm Publicises Declaration
Portions of the FBI declaration were publicised by Von Batten-Montague-York, a Washington-based lobbying firm hired by former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar ahead of the 2027 presidential election.
In a post on its X handle, the firm said it was reviewing a large volume of records received from the FBI and redacting portions where necessary.
The firm said the FBI declaration demonstrated that an investigation involving Tinubu had been officially acknowledged by the US court.
“The FBI states under oath that the court has already determined that a criminal investigation of Nigerian President Bola Tinubu was officially acknowledged,” the firm said.
It said the document was being released in response to claims that Tinubu had never been criminally investigated.
“We are posting this document to counter the claim made yesterday that President Tinubu was never criminally investigated and is simply following the law to protect his privacy,” the firm said.
“That claim is false, as shown by the FBI’s sworn declaration below.”
The development has subsequently generated a fresh political dispute between supporters of the President and opposition figures, with both sides offering sharply different interpretations of the significance of the records.
Presidency Dismisses Claims as Political Propaganda
Reacting to the development, Special Adviser to the President on Media and Public Communications, Sunday Dare, dismissed the claims surrounding the FBI records as politically motivated.
Dare accused Atiku of using a Washington-based lobbying firm to generate controversy around historical US records ahead of the 2027 election.
He described the campaign as “a clinical demonstration of desperation” and argued that the materials being circulated did not amount to an intelligence breakthrough.
“The coordinated media blitz orchestrated around a Washington, D.C. advisory firm is not an intelligence breakthrough; it is a clinical demonstration of desperation,” Dare said.
The presidential aide also questioned the credibility of statements being issued by the lobbying firm, stressing that its representations should not be portrayed as the official position of the US government.
“The incendiary press releases being carefully churned out from Washington are public relations propaganda sheets passed off as the view of the U.S. Government. They are not,” he said.
Dare further challenged those making allegations concerning classified intelligence to produce evidence supporting their claims.
“Sane minds must categorically dismiss these reports as fabricated, politically motivated, and entirely unsupported by evidence,” he said.
“We demand that they produce the so-called ‘highly classified intelligence report,’ identify their unnamed sources, and provide tangible evidence for their wild allegations.”
Presidency Questions $1.2 Million Lobbying Arrangement
Dare also alleged that publicly available US Department of Justice Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) filings showed that Atiku contracted Von Batten-Montague-York, L.C. on a $1.2 million, 12-month retainer.
According to Dare, the arrangement was intended to “counterbalance” Nigerian government narratives and use historical US judicial records for political leverage ahead of the 2027 elections.
He also questioned the role of the firm’s principal, Dr Karl-Marx Edward Okeke-Von Batten, in the ongoing FOIA litigation.
“Okeke-Von Batten must have conned a desperate Alhaji Abubakar Atiku into believing that he has access to everyone in the Trump administration, including President Trump himself,” Dare alleged.
The presidential aide maintained that the lobbying firm had no role in the US court proceedings, which he said had been ongoing since 2023.
“He has absolute zero to do with what is playing out in the U.S. court system,” Dare said.
“The case has been active since 2023, and the FBI’s main concern is simply the protection of the techniques by which it gathers information and the safety of its sources.”
Dare Rejects Link Between Tinubu’s Travel and FOIA Case
Dare also rejected suggestions linking Tinubu’s foreign travel to the ongoing FOIA proceedings.
He said the President was on a previously scheduled annual leave and maintained that there was no connection between Tinubu’s European trip and the US court case.
“This orchestrated distraction attempts to tie the President’s movements to foreign legal proceedings, but the facts are clear: President Tinubu is on a previously scheduled annual leave, and there is absolutely no connection between the President’s European trip and the ongoing U.S. FOIA proceedings,” he said.
Tinubu’s Lawyer Defends Withholding of Records
Dare further cited comments made by Tinubu’s lawyer, Wole Afolabi, SAN, who recently addressed the FOIA proceedings during an appearance on Channels Television.
According to Dare, Afolabi explained that the withholding of portions of the records was based on US legal provisions designed to protect confidential investigative processes.
Dare said the lawyer also argued that if Tinubu had been criminally liable under US law at the time of the investigation, American authorities would have indicted and prosecuted him.
“He emphasized the core reality: if the president had been criminally liable under U.S. law during past investigations, American authorities would have indicted and prosecuted him at the time,” Dare said.
Opposition Pressed Over 2027 Agenda
Dare accused the opposition of concentrating on decades-old US records instead of presenting Nigerians with detailed policy alternatives ahead of the 2027 presidential election.
“The opposition’s 2027 framework remains devoid of noble economic blueprints, structural innovation, or issue-based engagement,” he said.
He argued that the forthcoming election should ultimately be determined by the performance of political leaders, their policy proposals and their ability to deliver tangible improvements to Nigerians.
“True democratic validation is earned through the ballot box and tangible service delivery to the citizens at home, not through manufactured headlines bought and paid for in foreign currency,” Dare said.
Tinubu’s Legal Team Opposes Further Disclosure
Tinubu’s legal team has opposed further disclosure of the records, arguing that the release of personal information contained in government archives would violate his privacy rights.
The latest FBI declaration therefore leaves the central dispute focused on what additional records, if any, can legally be released under the US Freedom of Information Act and what those records may contain.
While the FBI has confirmed that the records were compiled during an investigation involving drug-trafficking crimes and that a court has recognised an official acknowledgement of an investigation involving Tinubu, the available filing, as presented in the current proceedings, does not establish that Tinubu committed a drug-trafficking offence or was convicted of one.
The controversy is nevertheless likely to remain a major political issue as Nigeria approaches the 2027 presidential election, with opposition figures demanding greater disclosure of the historical records and the Presidency insisting that the issue is being politically exploited.