FBI Files: Tinubu Was Under Investigation For Drugs

In a formal legal submission before the United States judiciary, the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has confirmed that Nigerian President Bola Ahmed Tinubu was the subject of a criminal investigation into drug-trafficking crimes during the early 1990s. This confirmation was articulated in a sworn declaration filed in a US federal court as part of ongoing public records litigation.

The legal declaration was submitted on August 28, 2026, before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The filing forms part of an ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit that seeks public access to official FBI files and records pertaining to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

Court Filings and Freedom of Information Act Requests

In the official court filing, the FBI explicitly detailed the underlying origin of the responsive documents, stating that

“the responsive records herein were compiled in furtherance of the FBI’s investigation of multiple individuals for drug trafficking crimes.”

Addressing prior judicial determinations in the legal battle, the federal law enforcement agency also stated that

“the court has already determined that an official acknowledgement had been made of an investigation of Bola Tinubu.”

This recent legal declaration follows a pivotal judicial ruling issued in April 2025 by United States District Judge Beryl Howell. In her decision, Judge Howell held that the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) could no longer rely on standard “Glomar” responses—a legal mechanism permitting government agencies to refuse to confirm or deny the existence of requested records—to withhold details regarding the historical inquiry.

Judge Howell ruled that the law enforcement agencies had failed to establish sufficient privacy grounds to conceal the fact that Tinubu had been the subject of a criminal investigation. Consequently, she ordered the agencies to process all non-exempt records sought under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

However, the judicial ruling did not establish that President Tinubu committed a drug-trafficking offence, nor did it find or conclude that he was ever convicted of any crime.

The latest court declaration directly relates to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests originally filed by American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan. Among the extensive archives requested by Greenspan were the “entire FBI file for Bola Ahmed Tinubu” and specific FBI 302 interview records involving Tinubu from FBI Case No. 245-IP-71386-UUUUUU, covering the period between 1992 and 1993.

Greenspan’s legal requests formed part of a broader, comprehensive effort to obtain official United States government documents concerning a Chicago heroin-trafficking operation that operated in the early 1990s.

Also Read: Bank of America VP Erin Piacenti Stabbed to Death, Police Say

Despite the court order, the FBI has continued to withhold certain portions of the requested records. The agency cited several statutory FOIA exemptions covering personal privacy rights, confidential sources, sensitive law-enforcement techniques, and information whose public release could potentially endanger individuals. Furthermore, the agency stated that it could not publicly disclose the full basis for its reliance on some of these specific legal exemptions.

Disclosure of Declaration by Washington Advisory Firm

The court declaration gained renewed international attention after Von Batten-Montague-York, a Washington-based lobbying firm engaged by former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar ahead of Nigeria’s 2027 presidential election, publicised key portions of the FBI filing. In a public statement shared on its official X handle, the lobbying firm disclosed that it was actively reviewing a large volume of records received from the FBI and was redacting specific portions where necessary.

Highlighting the sworn statements contained within the legal filing, the firm wrote:

“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 explained that it chose to release the document publicly to counter assertions that President Tinubu had never been subjected to a criminal investigation by United States law enforcement authorities. The firm stated:

“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,”

adding further:

“That claim is false, as shown by the FBI’s sworn declaration below.”

Presidency Dismisses Claims as Politically Motivated Propaganda

Reacting swiftly to the development and the surrounding public commentary, the Special Adviser to the President on Media and Public Communications, Sunday Dare, forcefully dismissed the claims concerning the FBI records as politically motivated. Dare accused former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar of utilizing a Washington-based lobbying firm to manufacture public controversy in the lead-up to the 2027 presidential election.

Dare characterized the opposition campaign as “a clinical demonstration of desperation” and asserted that the public relations materials being distributed did not represent any form of genuine intelligence discovery.

“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 stated.

The Presidential Spokesperson went on to challenge the credibility of the representations made by the lobbying firm, arguing that its statements should not be presented as reflecting the official position of the United States 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 asserted.

Furthermore, Dare directly challenged those making allegations against the President to produce verifiable evidence supporting their claims of secret intelligence.

“Sane minds must categorically dismiss these reports as fabricated, politically motivated, and entirely unsupported by evidence,”

Dare said. He added:

“We demand that they produce the so-called ‘highly classified intelligence report,’ identify their unnamed sources, and provide tangible evidence for their wild allegations.”

Expanding on the commercial background of the lobbying firm, Dare alleged that publicly available filings under the United States Department of Justice Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) confirm that Atiku Abubakar contracted Von Batten-Montague-York, L.C. on a $1.2 million, 12-month retainer. According to Dare, this commercial arrangement was specifically designed to “counterbalance” Nigerian government narratives and to leverage historical United States judicial records for political advantage ahead of the 2027 election cycle.

Dare also questioned the direct role and involvement of the firm’s principal, Dr Karl-Marx Edward Okeke-Von Batten, in the ongoing Freedom of Information Act litigation in Washington.

“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.

He insisted that the lobbying firm has had no structural role or participation in the United States court proceedings, which have been underway for years.

“He has absolute zero to do with what is playing out in the U.S. court system,”

Dare said, explaining further:

“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.”

Legal Defense and Opposition Criticism Ahead of 2027

In his response, Dare also firmly rejected any attempt to connect President Tinubu’s current foreign travel with the FOIA court proceedings in the United States, clarifying that the President was simply taking a previously scheduled annual leave.

“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,”

Dare stated.

To reinforce the administration’s position, Dare cited recent public statements made by President Tinubu’s legal counsel, Wole Afolabi, SAN, who spoke regarding the FOIA proceedings during an appearance on Channels Television. According to Dare, Afolabi explained that ongoing legal efforts to withhold portions of the FBI records are grounded entirely in standard United States legal provisions designed to safeguard confidential investigative processes and sensitive sources.

Dare emphasized that Afolabi highlighted a central legal reality regarding the historical matter, noting that if President Tinubu had been criminally liable under United States law during past investigations, federal authorities in America would have indicted and prosecuted him at that time.

“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 recounted.

Critiquing the strategy of political opponents, Dare accused the opposition of focusing excessively on decades-old records from foreign jurisdictions rather than offering substantive policy alternatives to the Nigerian electorate.

“The opposition’s 2027 framework remains devoid of noble economic blueprints, structural innovation, or issue-based engagement,”

he observed.

Concluding his statement, Dare argued that the outcome of Nigeria’s upcoming elections should be determined by governance achievements and concrete policy initiatives within the country, rather than international legal controversies.

“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.

Meanwhile, President Tinubu’s legal team continues to maintain its opposition to the further public disclosure of the archival records, contending that releasing personal information retrieved from government archives would violate his privacy rights.