The United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has asked a federal court in Washington, D.C., for permission to privately submit highly sensitive declarations explaining why it is withholding records relating to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
The request was contained in a motion filed on Thursday, August 20, 2026, in the ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, Aaron Greenspan v. Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys et al., before U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell.
The FBI is seeking to submit two declarations to the court ex parte and in camera, meaning the documents would be provided privately for the judge’s review rather than placed on the public record.
The agency said the additional declarations are necessary to explain its decision to withhold certain information requested by Aaron Greenspan, who has been pursuing the release of U.S. government records concerning Tinubu.
Among the records sought by Greenspan is “the entire FBI file for Bola Ahmed Tinubu” as well as FBI Form 302 interview reports involving Tinubu from 1992 and 1993 under FBI Case No. 245-IP-71386-UUUUUU.
The FBI has relied on several exemptions under the U.S. FOIA law to justify withholding portions of the requested records, including Exemptions 6, 7(C), 7(D), 7(E) and 7(F).
The agency said some of the withheld material relates to law-enforcement techniques and procedures and argued that releasing certain information could compromise those methods.
It also invoked a safety-related exemption, stating that disclosure of some of the information “could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual.”
However, the FBI did not publicly identify the individual whose safety could allegedly be affected or disclose the specific information that it believes could create such a risk.
The agency argued that providing a full public explanation of its reliance on Exemptions 7(E) and 7(F) could itself undermine the interests those exemptions are intended to protect.
It is therefore asking Judge Howell to examine the additional explanations privately.
According to the filing, the FBI expects to submit the proposed declarations to the court by August 28, subject to approval of its request.
The latest development forms part of a long-running legal battle over Greenspan’s efforts to obtain U.S. government records relating to Tinubu.
The case has included requests for documents connected to historical U.S. investigations involving the Nigerian president, including records dating back to the early 1990s.
The FBI’s latest filing, however, does not accuse Tinubu of committing a crime. Rather, it concerns the agency’s legal justification for withholding information requested under the FOIA.
The safety reference in the filing has also generated speculation. Von Batten-Montague-York, L.C., a U.S.-based lobbying and policy advisory firm involved in the broader dispute, interpreted the FBI’s reference to potential danger as an indication that Tinubu himself could be concerned about his safety.
The firm subsequently discussed the issue on social media.
However, the FBI filing itself does not state that Tinubu is the person whose safety could be endangered. It refers broadly to “any individual,” making it unclear from the public document who the agency believes could face a potential risk.
The records sought by Greenspan have been at the centre of litigation concerning historical allegations and investigations involving Tinubu. Those allegations have been disputed and should not be treated as established criminal findings against the president.
Greenspan has opposed the FBI’s request to submit the additional declarations privately. The filing states that the parties conferred on August 19 but were unable to reach an agreement.
Judge Howell must now determine whether to allow the FBI to provide the additional explanations privately and, ultimately, whether the agency has sufficiently justified its decision to withhold the requested records.
If the judge grants the request, the sensitive declarations would initially remain accessible only to the court rather than being released to the public.
The court’s decision could determine the next stage of the continuing FOIA battle over the release of U.S. government records concerning Tinubu.
_Adopted from a report by This Dawn_
