President Bola Tinubu’s fresh attempt to stop the release of records held by the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration has triggered heated reactions among Nigerians on social media.
Several commenters questioned why the President was opposing the disclosure of the records, while others demanded transparency, saying his position had only fuelled further suspicion around a controversy that has followed him for decades.
Tinubu, through his lawyers, asked the United States District Court for the District of Columbia to reject a request by American transparency activist, Aaron Greenspan, seeking access to records concerning him.
His legal team argued that the US Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act protected the information and that there was no public interest warranting its disclosure.
The lawyers also maintained that Greenspan’s request was politically motivated and amounted to an attempt to obtain private information about Tinubu through government files.
NAIJAONPOINT reports that the records being sought include the “entire FBI file” on Tinubu and FBI Form 302 interview records relating to him between 1992 and 1993.
In April 2025, US District Judge Beryl Howell ordered the FBI and DEA to lift their “Glomar” responses, under which the agencies had refused to confirm or deny whether responsive records existed, and directed them to process the request subject to applicable exemptions.
But the latest legal move has done little to quiet the controversy.
On Facebook, Yakubu Danjuma invoked the legal maxim, “He who comes to equity, must come with clean hands,” while another commenter, Omotayour Olabisi Sanni, put the demand more bluntly: “If you have nothing to hide let them release it.”
Benson Iboroakam Anthony asked, “So Pharaoh dey fear?” Another user, Oru Emmanuel, simply asked, “What is he afraid of?”
The argument by Tinubu’s lawyers that there was no public interest in the records also came under attack.
“Which one is lack of public interest, we are fully interested please,” Canice Ogaraku wrote, while Fortune Idiong stated, “The public is very much interested in this matter.”
Igbo Malu Onye Iro Gi added, “Guilty conscience fears no accusations,” while Soye Daopuye questioned the decision by a public officer to keep his past dealings away from public scrutiny.
“A public officer wants his recorded past dealings to remain secret. No be voodoo be that?” Daopuye wrote.
Another commenter, Maxwell de Don, argued that a clean record should not be difficult to expose, saying, “If I’m clean, I should be proud for my record to be seen round the whole world.”
Similarly, Ahmad Jaagi asked, “If the records were good, will this you prevent them?” Dan Kauye also questioned whether there was anything private in information that had already entered the public domain.
The comments, however, were not uniformly critical of the President.
One Facebook user, Ifeoma Linda Onwumere, challenged those demanding the release of the records to provide evidence, accusing them of pursuing the matter out of hatred.
Another commenter, Joe Abraham-Isaac Efughu, introduced a political dimension into the debate by asking whether the same people would hold the same position if the records concerned opposition figures Peter Obi or Atiku Abubakar.
That intervention prompted another user, Oniconx Grand, to respond that “the subject of discussion here is Tinubu, not Atiku.”
Buchi Digital took a more measured position, saying transparency and accountability were important, particularly where public officials were concerned, and that Nigerians deserved “clear answers and credible information.”
Ola Ibrahim echoed the call for accountability, writing, “Oga nobody above law.”
The debate became more emotional in some quarters, with commenters questioning how a sitting President could be at the centre of a prolonged controversy over records held by a foreign law-enforcement agency.
“I am wondering how this man became a president sef,” Kamal Umar Nafada wrote.
Sunny Odu similarly reacted, “Imagine the whole country president,” while another commenter urged Tinubu to answer the questions surrounding the records.
Some users also made claims about the reasons for the withholding of the records that were not supported by evidence contained in the report. Such claims included allegations that Nigerian public funds were being used to prevent the release of the documents.
The controversy dates back to the 1993 US civil forfeiture proceedings involving $460,000 held in an account in Tinubu’s name.
US authorities had alleged that the funds represented proceeds of narcotics trafficking or were involved in prohibited financial transactions.
The All Progressives Congress had argued during the 2023 presidential election litigation that the proceeding was civil and did not amount to a criminal conviction. The Presidential Election Petition Court subsequently held that the petitioners had failed to establish that Tinubu had been arrested, arraigned, convicted or sentenced in a criminal case in the United States.
Nevertheless, the issue has remained a recurring subject of political debate, with opposition figures and activists continuing to seek more information from US authorities.
The African Democratic Congress spokesman, Bolaji Abdullahi, described Tinubu’s opposition to the release of the records as suspicious and said the President should allow their disclosure if he wanted to clear his name.
“Why is the President opposing the release of his past records? That is suspicious. The President should allow them to be released to clear himself,” Abdullahi said.
The NDC National Publicity Secretary, Osa Director, also argued that the political nature of the request should not be used as a reason to keep the records from Nigerians.
He said the controversy had lasted for more than two decades and urged Tinubu to clear the air once and for all.
For now, however, the matter remains before the US court. Tinubu’s lawyers are asking that the FBI and DEA be allowed to retain their redactions and withhold portions of the records, relying on exemptions covering law-enforcement information and personal privacy.
While the online reactions have intensified, the FOIA case itself does not amount to a criminal prosecution or a judicial finding that Tinubu committed a drug-trafficking offence. It is, at this stage, a legal dispute over access to records held by US government agencies.
Okikiola Adewale is a young and vibrant undergraduate pen pusher with training in both print and digital journalism. He has a flair for writing, content development and people-oriented reporting to seek societal change.
What do you think about this?
Drop your opinion in the comment section.
FOLLOW US & Share this with someone who needs to see this.
