By 247ureports.com
A US federal judge has ordered the FBI and DEA to give fuller reasons for withholding records on President Bola Tinubu and an alleged heroin trafficking associate, while rejecting the plaintiff’s attempt to take evidence from Tinubu over alleged cyberattacks, and the two sides in the fight are describing the ruling in opposite ways.
Judge Beryl Howell of the US District Court for the District of Columbia delivered the ruling in a memorandum opinion on October 30, 2026, in the Freedom of Information Act case brought by activist Aaron Greenspan. She denied Greenspan’s application for limited discovery from Tinubu and from DCI Group, the lobbying firm that represents the Nigerian government, over alleged cyberattacks on his website, holding that the proposed inquiry was not relevant to deciding whether the FBI and DEA searched properly or justified their withholdings. She also denied his motion for summary judgment, rejected his request for judicial notice, and refused a separate application by Karl Von Batten, who runs the Von Batten-Montague-York lobbying firm that works for Atiku Abubakar, to file an amicus brief.
On the substance, the judge granted the government’s cross-motion only in part. Reports of the opinion say she found that the FBI had carried out an adequate search and was entitled to withhold some information under FOIA Exemption 5, but directed the FBI and DEA to file additional declarations explaining their reliance on privacy, confidential-source and law-enforcement exemptions and why information already disclosed in public court records could not be separated and released, and to propose an expedited schedule for further proceedings after consulting Greenspan. The case is not over, and the dispute over how much of the historical material must be released is unresolved.
Presidential spokesman Bayo Onanuga publicised the ruling on X, emphasising that the court rejected the discovery request against Tinubu. The Von Batten firm, in a post on X, accused the Presidency of “lying by omission,” said the court had “essentially denied” the agencies’ attempt to hide the files, and said the judge “blasted” the FBI and DEA over the link between Tinubu and his alleged associate, Abiodun Agbele, and for downplaying wiretaps. It called the ruling “the clearest signal” that Tinubu was connected to heroin trafficking and said it expects the documents to be released in part or in whole, and it shared the opinion in a cloud folder. That is the firm’s reading and opinion, and 247ureports.com has not independently reviewed the documents or verified the claim about wiretaps.
The court’s findings do not go as far as the firm suggests. In April 2025 the judge held that the agencies’ refusal to confirm or deny the existence of records was neither logical nor plausible, because both the FBI and DEA had already acknowledged investigating Tinubu in connection with Agbele’s drug ring, and ordered them to search and release non-exempt records. That is a ruling about disclosure and about what the agencies have publicly confirmed, not a finding that Tinubu committed an offence. Tinubu was never charged. He surrendered about $460,000 in a 1993 civil forfeiture, and he and the Presidency have consistently denied any involvement in drug trafficking.
Tinubu is an intervenor in the case and has argued for privacy protection for the records. Neither Greenspan nor the FBI and DEA had commented on the latest ruling at the time of this report.
