Former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar has called on the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation to release any lawfully disclosable Tinubu FBI records, rejecting the agency’s argument that publicly explaining some withheld material could put lives at risk. The demand followed an FBI application dated 20 August 2026 seeking permission to give a US judge confidential explanations for withholding parts of the records.
The dispute does not mean the documents will automatically become public. A US court must first consider the FBI’s reasons for secrecy and decide which information, if any, can be released under the Freedom of Information Act, known as FOIA.
Atiku, the African Democratic Congress presidential candidate, made the demand in a statement issued in Abuja on Saturday, 22 August, by his media aide, Phrank Shaibu.
The former vice-president said he was not asking the FBI to reveal the identities of undercover officers, confidential informants or sensitive investigative methods. He argued that such details could be removed while other records that are not legally protected are released.
“Protect your agents. Protect your sources. Protect legitimate investigative methods,” Atiku said.
However, he accused the agency of using legitimate security protections too broadly and argued that Nigerians had a right to examine information concerning the background of their president.
Related news
What the FBI is asking the court to do
According to the vanguard, the FBI wants to submit what is legally described as an ex parte, in-camera declaration.
In simple terms, this would allow the judge to examine the FBI’s explanation privately, without making it available to Atiku, the public or other parties. US agencies may request this process when they believe an open explanation would reveal the same sensitive information they are seeking to protect.
The records are connected to long-running FOIA requests seeking documents concerning allegations linked to President Bola Tinubu. Allegations contained in investigative records do not, by themselves, prove criminal wrongdoing.
Tinubu was not criminally charged in the US matter frequently cited by his political opponents. A 1993 civil forfeiture resulted in funds linked to him being surrendered to the US government, but he has maintained that the case ended through a civil settlement.
A related New Daily Prime investigation into the Tinubu FOIA case reported that any private judicial review would help the judge determine whether the disputed documents are covered by legal exemptions or should be disclosed.
Atiku connects records dispute to economic hardship
Atiku also used the statement to renew his criticism of Tinubu’s economic policies, particularly the removal of the petrol subsidy.
He argued that higher fuel costs had affected transport fares, food prices, business expenses and employment, leaving many households under pressure. He questioned the FBI’s reference to danger to lives while claiming that Nigerians were already suffering serious consequences from government policy.
Atiku has said that, if elected, he would introduce a targeted and time-limited support system rather than restore the previous open-ended subsidy arrangement. The Presidency has challenged him to explain how the proposal would be funded and whether it would require additional public borrowing.
The Tinubu administration maintains that ending the subsidy was necessary because its cost had become unsustainable. Government officials say the policy has improved public finances and freed money for distribution among federal, state and local authorities, although Nigerians continue to face increased living costs.
Atiku’s statement represents his political position and does not determine what the US court will decide. The FBI may still be permitted to withhold information where disclosure could expose protected sources, investigative methods, personal data or national security interests.
For now, the court—not Atiku, the FBI or the Nigerian government—will determine whether further records should be released and what information must remain confidential.
