Former presidential aide, Reno Omokri, has defended President Bola Tinubu’s opposition to the release of his unredacted United States Federal Bureau of Investigation and Drug Enforcement Administration records.
Speaking in a statement on X on Monday, Omokri argued that the existence of FBI records containing Tinubu’s name did not mean the Nigerian President had a criminal record.
According to Omokri, the FBI maintains extensive files on individuals for reasons unrelated to criminal activity, including background checks conducted for US visa applicants.
He said such records could contain sensitive personal information, including biometric, biographical and financial data, and questioned whether private records belonging to an individual should be made public simply because that person is a political figure.
Omokri also claimed that US authorities had previously cleared Tinubu of criminal wrongdoing.
He referred to correspondence he said was exchanged between the US Embassy and Nigeria’s then Inspector-General of Police, Tafa Balogun, in February 2003. According to Omokri, Balogun had requested information about whether the FBI held criminal records involving Tinubu, who was then Governor of Lagos State.
Omokri said the US Embassy responded the following day with what he described as an “all clear” concerning criminal records.
He further said he had personally investigated Tinubu’s academic and other records during a 2022 visit to Chicago while he was a member of the opposition.
The comments come amid an ongoing legal battle in the United States over access to Tinubu’s records.
PUNCH Online reported that Tinubu had asked the US District Court for the District of Columbia to reject a request seeking the release of his unredacted FBI and DEA records.
The President’s lawyers argued that the US Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act protected the records from disclosure. They also contended that the request was politically motivated and that no recognised public interest under US law justified releasing the information.
The case followed a Freedom of Information Act request by American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan seeking records relating to Tinubu.
The FBI has relied on several FOIA exemptions in resisting the release of portions of the records, including exemptions relating to privacy, confidential sources, investigative techniques and the safety of individuals.
The controversy over Tinubu’s US records dates back to the 1990s and became a major issue during the 2023 presidential election.
In 1993, a US District Court in Illinois ordered the forfeiture of $460,000 held in an account linked to Tinubu after US authorities alleged that the funds represented proceeds of narcotics trafficking or were connected to prohibited financial transactions.
The All Progressives Congress maintained during the presidential election litigation that the matter was a civil forfeiture proceeding rather than a criminal conviction.
In September 2023, the Presidential Election Petition Court held that petitioners had failed to establish that Tinubu had been arrested, arraigned, convicted or sentenced in a criminal case in the United States.
Meanwhile, opposition groups have continued to demand the release of the records.
African Democratic Congress spokesperson Bolaji Abdullahi said Tinubu should support their release if he had nothing to hide, while Nigeria Democratic Congress National Publicity Secretary Osa Director also called for the records to be made public.
The current US case concerns access to government records under FOIA. It does not, by itself, amount to a criminal prosecution or establish that Tinubu committed a drug-trafficking offence.
