Former Vice President and African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, has taken a swipe at the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) over its bid to keep parts of its records concerning President Bola Tinubu away from public view.
Atiku questioned the FBI’s claim that releasing some of the records could endanger lives, arguing that such a justification should not become a blanket shield for information that can legally be disclosed.
“The FBI says disclosure could endanger lives. Which lives? Nigerians are already dying,” Atiku said in a statement issued on Saturday by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu.
The fresh controversy centres on a long-running Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) battle in the United States involving American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan, who has been seeking US government records connected to investigations involving Tinubu dating back to the early 1990s.
Greenspan filed FOIA requests seeking, among other documents, Tinubu’s entire FBI file and FBI Form 302 interview records linked to an FBI case from 1992–1993. The requests relate to records surrounding an old Chicago heroin-trafficking investigation and associated law-enforcement proceedings.
The FBI has previously relied on several FOIA exemptions to withhold portions of the requested material. The exemptions cover issues including personal privacy, confidential sources, law-enforcement investigative techniques and information whose disclosure could threaten an individual’s safety.
In its latest move, the FBI filed an application dated August 20 before the US District Court for the District of Columbia, asking to submit confidential declarations ex parte and in camera.
In simple terms, the bureau wants to explain its full reasons privately to the judge and under seal, rather than putting those details on the public court record. The FBI argued that publicly setting out the full basis for some of the exemptions could itself expose the sensitive information it is seeking to protect.
The FBI specifically cited concerns that disclosure could reveal law-enforcement techniques and procedures and could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of an individual. It said it could not fully explain the basis for invoking some of the exemptions in a public filing.
The development followed a series of court battles over the records. In April 2025, Judge Beryl Howell ruled against the FBI and DEA’s earlier use of a so-called Glomar response, under which agencies neither confirm nor deny the existence of particular records. The judge ordered the agencies to move beyond that position and process records that were not exempt from disclosure.
The agencies subsequently sought more time to comply with the court’s directives. The Justice Department asked for a 10-day extension, but Judge Howell granted only a limited extension, setting August 21 as the relevant deadline. Tinubu’s legal team also joined the request for additional time, but the judge did not grant the full extension sought.
The latest court proceedings do not mean that all of Tinubu’s FBI records have been released, nor do they establish any wrongdoing by the Nigerian President. Rather, the dispute is over which portions of the government records are legally protected from disclosure and which can be made public.
Against that backdrop, Atiku said legitimate security concerns should be respected, but insisted they should not be stretched so far that they prevent legitimate public scrutiny.
He said the FBI should protect undercover agents, confidential sources and genuine investigative methods, while redacting information that US law requires to remain secret.
“But do not stretch those protections until they become a bulletproof vest for Tinubu,” Atiku said.
The former Vice President also dragged the Tinubu administration’s economic policies into the controversy, particularly the removal of the petrol subsidy.
He argued that the policy had contributed to higher transport fares, food prices and production costs, with knock-on effects on employment and household incomes.
Atiku maintained that Nigerians have a legitimate interest in knowing the background and character of anyone seeking or occupying the nation’s highest political office.
He said his demand was not an attempt to dictate to the United States or interfere in its judicial process, but a democratic call for transparency concerning information that could be lawfully disclosed.
The intervention comes as Nigeria’s political parties have entered the campaign season ahead of the 2027 presidential election, with Atiku positioning himself as one of the major challengers to Tinubu.
Atiku has also recently renewed his promise to reverse the petrol subsidy removal if elected, arguing that the policy should be replaced with a more accountable system that prevents the abuses associated with the former subsidy regime.
For now, the FBI’s position remains that some material cannot safely be explained in public, while the legal battle continues over what should ultimately be released. The court process therefore leaves open the possibility that some records may become public, while other portions could remain sealed or heavily redacted.
Don’t Miss Out! Join our WhatsApp Channel for instant news updates. Click here to join
ALSO READ:
Fresh Twist in Tinubu US Records Battle as FBI Claims Disclosure Could Endanger Lives
Tinubu, US Court Clash Over Drug Allegation Files As President Seeks 10-Day Delay
