By DAYO ADESULU
The United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has disclosed that it separately searched the terms “Bola” and “Tinubu” while reviewing a multi-subject file connected to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request involving President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
The disclosure was contained in a September 23, 2026 court filing by the FBI and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in an ongoing FOIA lawsuit before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
The case, Greenspan v. Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01816-BAH, was filed by American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan, who has sought historical records from several U.S. government agencies concerning investigations dating back to the late 1980s and early 1990s.
FBI Searches ‘Bola’ and ‘Tinubu’ Separately
According to the latest filing, the FBI conducted both a term search and a manual, page-by-page review of a multi-subject file to identify records responsive to FOIA request 1588244-000.
The agency said it used the search terms “Bola” and “Tinubu” separately.
The filing states that the manual review was also part of the FBI’s effort to ensure that potentially responsive records were identified.
The disclosure came as the government responded to Greenspan’s challenge to the adequacy of the searches conducted by the agencies.
Greenspan had questioned whether the FBI’s search methodology sufficiently accounted for misspellings and routine typographical errors.
The FBI disputed that concern, pointing to the manual review of the file as an additional measure used in processing the request.
What the FBI Search Does Not Establish
Importantly, the latest filing does not disclose what the FBI found when it searched for “Bola” and “Tinubu.”
It also does not reveal the contents of any responsive records or establish that the search uncovered new evidence of criminal wrongdoing by Tinubu.
That distinction is important because the underlying litigation is a FOIA records-disclosure case, rather than a criminal prosecution of the Nigerian President.
A 2025 ruling by U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell established that the FBI and DEA could no longer rely on a “Glomar” response to refuse to confirm or deny the existence of certain investigative records relating to Tinubu and Abiodun Agbele. The ruling concerned access to government records and did not constitute a criminal judgment against Tinubu.
The Nigerian Presidency has also described the proceedings as a civil records-disclosure dispute, stressing that Tinubu has not been charged or convicted in the FOIA case.
FBI Defends Withholding of Some Records
Beyond the search methodology, the latest government filing deals extensively with the FBI and DEA’s decision to withhold or redact portions of responsive records under exemptions contained in the U.S. Freedom of Information Act.
The FBI cited FOIA Exemption 3, among other provisions, in connection with information protected by federal law.
The agency referred specifically to material involving federal grand-jury proceedings and certain electronic surveillance information, including pen-register information and material associated with Title III surveillance.
According to the government’s position, providing more detailed descriptions of the withheld material could itself reveal information that the law protects.
The FBI also defended its use of FOIA Exemption 5 for material connected to prosecutorial strategy and internal legal deliberations.
The government said some records could reveal the thought processes, legal impressions and strategies of personnel within U.S. Attorney’s Offices working on criminal cases involving third parties.
DEA Records Also Part of the Dispute
The DEA has separately defended its handling of responsive records.
The filing indicates that DEA records at issue include investigative documents such as DEA-6, DEA-292 and DEA-210 reports.
The agency cited several FOIA exemptions to justify withholding portions of those documents, including protections for confidential sources and sensitive investigative methods.
The government also said certain information was withheld because disclosure could expose individuals to potential violence or compromise sensitive law-enforcement operations.
According to the filing, the FBI similarly invoked an exemption protecting the identities and identifying information of individuals who could potentially face threats to their physical safety if identified.
Tinubu FOIA Case Continues
The latest development is part of a legal battle that has continued for several years.
Greenspan filed multiple FOIA requests between 2022 and 2023 with U.S. agencies including the FBI, DEA, CIA, Internal Revenue Service and Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys.
The requests sought records relating to investigations involving Tinubu, Abiodun Agbele and others connected to a broader historical investigation into a drug-trafficking and money-laundering network.
One of the FBI requests, numbered 1588244-000, sought the entire FBI file concerning Tinubu. A separate request, 1593615-000, sought FBI Form 302 interview records concerning Tinubu from 1992–1993.
The case has subsequently focused on what records the agencies must disclose and which portions can legally remain withheld or redacted.
President Tinubu has also intervened in the litigation and sought protection for records identifying him, citing privacy protections.
Why This Matters
The significance of the latest FBI disclosure lies primarily in what it reveals about the search process, rather than what it proves about the contents of the records.
The FBI has confirmed that it searched a multi-subject file using “Bola” and “Tinubu” as separate search terms and conducted a manual page-by-page review.
However, the filing does not disclose the results of those searches.
Therefore, the latest filing should not be interpreted as a new finding that Tinubu committed a crime. It instead provides additional information about how U.S. authorities searched and processed records in response to Greenspan’s FOIA request.
The broader litigation remains focused on transparency, privacy, law-enforcement exemptions and the legal limits on disclosure of government records.
What Happens Next?
The court will ultimately determine the outstanding disputes over the adequacy of the agencies’ searches and the legality of continued redactions and withholding.
Any future release of previously withheld records could provide additional information about the historical investigations.
For now, however, the latest FBI filing establishes the search terms and methodology—not the contents or conclusions of the records located.
FAQs
Did the FBI confirm that it has records concerning Tinubu?
The latest filing confirms that the FBI searched a multi-subject file using “Bola” and “Tinubu” separately. It does not disclose the full contents of the records identified.
Does the filing accuse Tinubu of a crime?
No. The filing concerns the processing and disclosure of government records under FOIA. It does not constitute a criminal charge or conviction.
What is Aaron Greenspan seeking?
Greenspan is seeking access to historical U.S. government records through FOIA requests involving Tinubu, Agbele and a broader investigation.
Are all the records being released?
No. The FBI and DEA are defending the withholding and redaction of portions of responsive records under several FOIA exemptions.
Is the case still ongoing?
Yes. The dispute continues before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia over searches, redactions and withheld information.
Conclusion
The latest FBI filing adds a new procedural detail to the long-running FOIA dispute involving records connected to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
The agency says it searched for “Bola” and “Tinubu” separately and supplemented its electronic search with a manual page-by-page review.
What remains undisclosed, however, is what those searches actually produced.
As the litigation continues, further court filings or document releases may clarify the nature and extent of the records being sought. Until then, the distinction between an investigation, the existence of government records and proof of criminal wrongdoing remains essential when reporting the case.
#TCNEWS #Tinubu #FBI #AaronGreenspan #FOIA #Nigeria #USNews #TinubuNews #FBIRecords
