FBI Warns Informants, Agents Could Face Assassination Over Release of Tinubu Records

The United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has warned that some of its informants and agents could be exposed to serious danger, including possible assassination, if sensitive records relating to investigations involving President Bola Ahmed Tinubu are made public.

The warning was contained in a court filing submitted to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in Washington, D.C., where the FBI is defending its decision to withhold portions of records sought under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

The case, before U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell, concerns requests for historical FBI records relating to Tinubu, including documents connected to investigations conducted in the early 1990s.

The records were sought by American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan, who filed FOIA requests seeking information held by the FBI and other U.S. federal agencies concerning Tinubu.

One of the requests reportedly sought the entire FBI file relating to Tinubu, while another specifically requested FBI Form 302 interview records associated with an FBI investigation identified as Case No. 245-IP-71386-UUUUUU, covering the period around 1992–1993.

The FBI has resisted the full disclosure of the records, citing several exemptions contained in the U.S. FOIA law.

Among the exemptions invoked is Exemption 7(F), which permits federal agencies to withhold law-enforcement information where disclosure could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of an individual.

In its latest submission, the bureau argued that releasing identifying information contained in the investigative records could expose confidential sources, informants and law-enforcement personnel to retaliation.

The FBI's position is that disclosure could potentially reveal the identities of people who assisted its investigations, as well as agents and other individuals involved in the investigative process.

The bureau has also argued that portions of the records could reveal sensitive law-enforcement methods, investigative procedures and information supplied by confidential sources.

Records Submitted to Judge

The dispute took a significant turn on August 28, when the FBI reportedly submitted the contested records to Judge Howell for private examination.

The records were submitted under seal and for in-camera review, meaning that the judge will examine them privately to determine whether the FBI's claims for withholding the information are justified under the FOIA law.

The submission followed an earlier order by Judge Howell directing the government to provide the disputed material and explain the basis for continuing to withhold it.

The records have not, however, been released to Greenspan or the public.

Judge Howell will ultimately determine whether the FBI may lawfully keep the material secret or whether some or all of the documents should be released, possibly with sensitive information redacted.

Historical Drug Investigation

The records being sought reportedly relate, among other things, to historical U.S. investigations involving allegations of narcotics trafficking and financial activities associated with Tinubu during the late 1980s and early 1990s.

The controversy has attracted particular attention because of a 1993 U.S. civil forfeiture proceeding involving approximately $460,000 in funds associated with Tinubu that were forfeited to the U.S. government.

Tinubu has denied wrongdoing.

Importantly, the current FOIA proceedings do not establish that Tinubu was criminally convicted of drug trafficking. The existence of an FBI investigation, allegations contained in investigative files or a civil forfeiture proceeding should not, by themselves, be presented as proof of a criminal conviction.

Tinubu Opposes Disclosure

Tinubu has also become involved in the litigation and has opposed the release of the records.

His legal position includes concerns over privacy and the potential reputational consequences of releasing information contained in historical government investigative files.

His lawyers have argued that the fact that some information about the matter may already be publicly known does not automatically eliminate the privacy protections attached to information held in government investigative files.

The FBI, meanwhile, maintains that disclosure must be balanced against the potential risks to people whose identities and roles appear in the records.

What the Court May Decide

The next major step is expected to come from Judge Howell after her review of the sealed material.

The judge could uphold the FBI's decision to withhold some or all of the records if she agrees that the statutory FOIA exemptions apply.

She could also order the release of portions of the documents, with names and other sensitive information redacted to protect confidential sources, agents or other individuals.

The latest development therefore does not mean that the FBI has publicly released evidence establishing drug-trafficking allegations against Tinubu.

Rather, it means that the bureau has placed the disputed records before the judge and is asking the court to permit it to continue withholding information that it says could expose individuals to serious danger.

The case has nevertheless generated renewed interest in Tinubu's historical dealings in the United States and in the extent to which American law-enforcement agencies possess records relating to investigations involving the Nigerian president.

The eventual ruling by Judge Howell could determine whether any additional portions of those records become available to the public.