By LEVI JOHNSON
A United States District Court in Washington, D.C., has ordered the immediate and transparent release of investigative records linked to Nigeria’s President, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, dealing a sharp judicial rebuke to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) over what the court described as persistent and unjustifiable delays.
The ruling, delivered on Monday, February 9, 2026, marks a decisive turning point in a long-running Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) battle that has spanned several years and drawn intense political attention in Nigeria and abroad.
Judge Loses Patience With U.S. Law Enforcement Agencies
In unusually blunt language, the presiding U.S. District Court judge accused the FBI and DEA of engaging in “unreasonable delay” and failing to act in good faith despite repeated court directives.
The judge rejected fresh requests by the agencies for additional time, making it clear that the era of procedural stalling was over.
According to the court, the public interest surrounding the records—given Tinubu’s position as a sitting African president—outweighs the agencies’ arguments for continued secrecy.
Clear Timetable for Release of Tinubu Records
To ensure compliance, the court laid out a strict and enforceable disclosure timetable, leaving little room for interpretation or delay.
Key Court-Ordered Deadlines
First Interim Release:
The FBI must submit its initial batch of reviewed documents within days of the ruling.
500-Page Requirement:
By March 13, 2026, the FBI is mandated to release no fewer than 500 reviewed pages related to the investigation.
Final Deadline:
All responsive records must be fully processed and produced no later than June 1, 2026.
In addition, the FBI and DEA are required to submit joint progress reports every 14 days, starting February 27, 2026, detailing:
The total number of pages reviewed
The number of pages released
The number of pages withheld and reasons for any redactions
Legal analysts say the bi-weekly reporting requirement is designed to prevent further foot-dragging and places the agencies under direct judicial supervision.
Court Rejects FBI’s Secrecy Arguments
The ruling builds on an earlier decision in which the court dismissed the FBI’s attempt to block disclosure entirely.
In that earlier judgment, the judge described the FBI’s rationale for withholding the records as “neither logical nor plausible,” especially considering the passage of time and Tinubu’s elevated public profile.
The court stressed that transparency is a cornerstone of democratic accountability, particularly where allegations have lingered for decades without full public clarification.
The 1993 Narcotics Forfeiture at the Center of the Case
At the heart of the FOIA dispute is a 1993 civil forfeiture case in the United States, in which $460,000 linked to Bola Tinubu was confiscated by U.S. authorities.
A U.S. District Court in Northern Illinois ruled at the time that the funds were connected to proceeds from narcotics trafficking, leading to their forfeiture to the U.S. government.
Tinubu’s legal defenders have consistently argued that:
The forfeiture was civil, not criminal
It did not amount to a conviction
No formal criminal charges were sustained against him
However, the current court order focuses not on conviction status, but on full disclosure of the underlying investigative files held by U.S. agencies, including internal reports, correspondence, and intelligence assessments.
Notably, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was formally removed from the case in April 2025 after asserting under oath that it possessed no relevant records relating to Tinubu.
Political Shockwaves in Nigeria
The U.S. court’s ultimatum has landed in Abuja like a political thunderbolt.
Opposition parties and civil society groups have seized on the ruling as validation of long-standing calls for transparency, while critics of the Tinubu administration describe the development as deeply damaging to Nigeria’s international image.
Opposition Reactions
Peter Obi and the African Democratic Congress (ADC) have linked the ruling to broader accusations of democratic backsliding, particularly following the Senate’s rejection of electronic transmission of election results, which they describe as a “renewed rigging plan.”
Former Minister of Sports Solomon Dalung questioned what he termed “selective justice,” pointing to the administration’s prosecution of former Attorney-General Abubakar Malami over alleged links to terror financing, while Tinubu’s own past remains under U.S. judicial scrutiny.
Presidency Yet to Respond
As of Monday night, the Nigerian Presidency had not issued an official statement responding to the U.S. court’s order.
However, legal observers say silence may be difficult to maintain as the March 13, 2026 deadline approaches, when the first substantial batch of documents is expected to be released.
Analysts note that the content of the initial disclosures could shape:
Domestic political debates
Ongoing legal challenges
Nigeria’s diplomatic posture with the United States
Why This Ruling Matters
Beyond partisan politics, experts say the case raises fundamental questions about:
Transparency and leadership credibility
The global scrutiny faced by elected officials
The power of FOIA laws to compel accountability, even decades later
With more than 30 years of secrecy potentially coming to an end, attention is now firmly fixed on what the FBI and DEA will release—and what the documents may reveal.
For now, the court has spoken clearly: the records must come out, and delays will no longer be tolerated.
#TinubuRecords #USCourtRuling #FOIA #NigeriaPolitics #BolaTinubu #FBI #DEA #Transparency #TCNews
