The Presidency yesterday broke its silence on the ongoing litigation surrounding the much-guarded historical past of the president in the United States, explaining why President Bola Tinubu, currently on a three-week vacation in Europe, is opposing the release of unredacted records held by U.S. law enforcement agencies.

It explained that the matter involves lawful exemptions under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and does not amount to a criminal case against President Tinubu.

However, the U.S.-based lobbyist, Dr Karl Von Batten, who was hired by Atiku, intensified calls on U.S. courts to put aside the FBI’s argument and order the release of the wiretap material the agency has on Tinubu.

The update follows the announcement of Karl’s appointment as White House Presidential Commissioner by U.S. President Donald Trump. Batten’s lobbying firm, Von Batten-Montague-York, L.C., announced the appointment in a post on X.

The Presidency, in a statement issued by presidential spokesman, Bayo Onanuga, amid renewed public debate over the matter, said the ongoing litigation before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia is a civil dispute over access to government records. It stressed that neither the court nor any U.S. government agency has found Tinubu guilty of criminal wrongdoing in the case.

The Presidency said the dispute dates to 2022, when Aaron Greenspan submitted FOIA requests to several U.S. government agencies seeking records relating to Tinubu. According to the statement, after some agencies withheld records or declined to confirm or deny whether certain records existed, Greenspan commenced Civil Action No. 23-1816 before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in 2023.

The Presidency further said it is the U.S. court that can determine whether President Tinubu’s records will be released or withheld in the ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case before it, and not Atiku Abubakar.

According to the Presidency, “the release or withholding of records under FOIA does not, by itself, establish criminal liability. The Nigerian media should note that this case is exclusively within the control of Judge Beryl A. Howell of the United States District Court. She will determine its outcome, based on the evidence, applicable law, and the parties’ arguments, not the wishful preference of Alhaji Atiku Abubakar or his agent, Mr Von Batten.”

As the 2027 general elections campaign goes into full swing, presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Atiku Abubakar, and his lobbyist, Ikemefuna Okeke Von Batten, have continued to claim that the U.S. government has criminal records against the Nigerian president, while urging the U.S. authorities to release findings of a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) report on alleged drug-trafficking records linked to Tinubu.

Onanuga accused the opposition of mischaracterising the matter that involves the civil forfeiture of funds by Tinubu to the U.S. government while he was being investigated for drug-related offences in 1993, six years before President Tinubu was elected the governor of Lagos State.

The Presidency recalled that the matter comes more than two decades after the American Consulate in Lagos, in a letter dated February 4, 2003, informed then Inspector-General of Police, Tafa Balogun, that an FBI records check had found no criminal arrest records, wants or warrants for Tinubu, who was then Lagos State governor.

The Presidency explained that, during the litigation, the defendants invoked what is known under U.S. law as the “Glomar defence”, under which a government agency may decline to confirm or deny the existence of certain records where doing so could reveal protected information. It said the defence is routinely invoked by U.S. law-enforcement and intelligence agencies where disclosure could expose investigative sources, methods or other protected information.

The court subsequently granted summary judgment in favour of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA), the Department of State, the Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), removing those agencies from the proceedings. The remaining aspects of the case involve the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).

The Presidency said that, in compliance with the court’s orders, the FBI and DEA released 399 pages of records, although portions of the documents were redacted pursuant to exemptions contained in US law. The plaintiff subsequently challenged the agencies’ decisions to withhold portions of the records.

According to the Presidency, the FBI and DEA, through the United States Department of Justice, opposed the demand for disclosure of the unredacted documents on several legal grounds. Other exemptions cited relate to the protection of personal privacy, confidential sources and law-enforcement techniques and procedures.

The Presidency added that President Tinubu, acting on the advice of his lawyers, had also asserted his rights under FOIA Exemption 7(C), which protects against unwarranted invasions of personal privacy. The statement said the next stage of the proceedings would be determined by the parties’ filings before the court.

It noted that the plaintiff has until September 11, 2026, to file any opposition and reply to the processes filed by the defendants and the intervenor, while the FBI, DEA and the intervenor have until September 18, 2026, to respond. The Presidency further cautioned against interpreting the release or withholding of records under FOIA as evidence of criminal liability.

REACTING, National Leader of the Peoples Redemption Party (PRP), Hakeem Baba-Ahmed, yesterday said the saga involving President Tinubu and Atiku over the president’s records with the United States has done more damage to Nigeria’s image.

Baba-Ahmed said the saga has done more damage to Nigeria’s image than the release of the records would.

Posting on X, the former presidential aide lamented that Nigeria is already damaged by issues of insecurity, corruption, poverty, and crimes. He wrote: “Shouldn’t we be more concerned over the damage being done to our image as Nigerians by the PBAT/FBI/Atiku saga? We are already damaged by seemingly outsourcing our national security, unspeakable levels of corruption, poverty, crimes and collapse of integrity of key institutions.”

But deputy spokesperson of the House of Representatives, Philip Agbese, has criticised opposition figures campaigning around the saga, saying the move could damage Nigeria’s collective image and hurt citizens living and doing business abroad more than just the president alone. The lawmaker, who spoke on behalf of concerned lawmakers and civil society groups, said political differences should not be allowed to undermine the interests of Nigerians outside the country.

He argued that the circulation of old documents and unproven allegations in foreign political circles could have consequences for Nigerians seeking education, employment, investment and business opportunities overseas.

“This has gone beyond politics. When desperate politicians begin to export their political battles and package Nigeria as a country whose leadership is allegedly built around criminality, they are not hurting President Tinubu alone. They are damaging the image of every Nigerian who travels, studies, works, does business or seeks opportunities abroad,” Agbese said.

The lawmaker acknowledged the right of opposition parties to criticise the administration but cautioned against involving foreign governments and institutions in Nigeria’s domestic political contests. “Political competition is legitimate, but there must be a line that every responsible politician must refuse to cross. You cannot spend your time telling the world that your own country is being led by criminals simply because you want to defeat the person in power,” he said.

Agbese urged the Trump administration to scrutinise the motives and credibility of those presenting information about Nigeria and its leadership through political lobbying.”
MEANWHILE, there appears to be more woes for President Tinubu as the U.S.-based lobbyist, Dr Karl Von Batten, says the FBI admits that the Tinubu-responsive records contain wiretap material.

“In the FBI filing before the court, the FBI asked the court not to allow the disclosure of highly sensitive “wiretap” recordings responsive to Nigerian President Bola Tinubu.

“Not surprisingly, the FBI goes on to specifically invoke FOIA Exemption 3 and 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510–2520, the federal law governing Title III wiretaps, to protect the identities of individuals targeted for interception and information obtained from those wiretaps. The problem with this argument is that #FOIA has limited protection for deceased persons and persons convicted of a crime. The FBI itself states on pages 19–20 of Document 100-1 that “privacy concerns are typically obviated once an individual is deceased.” We are speculating, but the only targeted person we believe is alive in that case is Nigerian President Bola Tinubu”, he added in an updated X post.

Atiku hired the firm last March for $1.2 million for a period of 12 months. The Washington-based Von Batten-Montague-York, L.C., has been pushing for the release of President Tinubu’s records of alleged drug trafficking and money laundering investigation files. The firm has been lobbying powerful US lawmakers and high-ranking public officials, including President Trump, with a view to scuttling Tinubu’s 2027 re-election bid.

Tinubu has had a rocky relationship with Washington over the past year. In 2025, the U.S. stepped up diplomatic pressure on Nigeria, accusing it of not doing enough to protect Christians amid the country’s myriad armed conflicts.

The accusation that Christians face “persecution” or even “genocide” — long popular among the religious right but disputed by independent analysts and the Nigerian government — appeared to have found purchase among the right-wing Trump administration. The U.S. launched strikes against what it said were Islamic State-linked targets in northwest Nigeria on Christmas Day.

Nigeria launched its own multimillion-dollar lobbying blitz in response to the U.S. pressure. While diplomatic gaps remain, Abuja has found common ground with Washington in increasing military cooperation, including with a U.S. troop deployment to Nigeria and a major joint operation against Islamic State fighters in May.

The Senior Political Assistant to Atiku, Demola Olarewaju, on Thursday said the former vice president is battling President Tinubu both domestically and internationally. Olarewaju said the battle will end with Atiku defeating Tinubu in 2027. He was reacting to Karl Von Batten’s appointment to serve as a White House presidential commissioner.

Olarewaju posted on X: “Not enjoyable news for the desperate APC presidential horde who spent $9m to lobby the US into endorsing Tinubu for another failed tenure only to meet Atiku in front. Domestically and internationally, Atiku is battling Tinubu and will defeat him in 2027.”

Also reacting, a Yoruba leader, Chief Akin Malaolu, has said the United States government’s appointment of Karl Von Batten shows that President Trump has a soft spot for Atiku. Malaolu made the claim in a statement on Thursday.

Malaolu said: “While there is no evidence that Trump’s appointment was made because of Von Batten’s relationship with Atiku, the coincidence is politically significant and demonstrates the level of access and institutional credibility surrounding the Washington-based lobbyist. For the opposition, the development is a reminder that Nigeria’s political contest ahead of 2027 is no longer confined to the domestic arena. The battle over Nigeria’s democratic credentials, economic direction, governance and international reputation is increasingly being fought in global policy centres, particularly Washington.”