American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan has accused President Bola Ahmed Tinubu of misleading a United States federal court over his political status in 1993, alleging that the President’s legal team told the court that he was not involved in politics and had not held elected office at the time.
Greenspan made the allegation during an interview with former presidential spokesperson Laolu Akande while discussing his long-running Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case seeking access to US government records relating to investigations involving Tinubu.
According to Greenspan, the argument formed part of Tinubu’s legal position in the case before US District Judge Beryl Howell, where the President’s lawyers have opposed the wider release of investigative records, citing privacy protections.
Greenspan argued that the claim about Tinubu’s political status in 1993 was inconsistent with publicly available records showing that Tinubu was elected to the Nigerian Senate in 1992 and served during the short-lived Third Republic.
He said Tinubu’s own published account of his political history also acknowledges his election to the Senate in 1992.
“My understanding is that Mr. Tinubu was in the Nigerian Senate in 1993, and he in fact was elected in 1992,” Greenspan said, arguing that the claim that Tinubu was not involved in politics at the time was therefore inaccurate.
The dispute is part of a broader FOIA litigation initiated by Greenspan, who has sought records from US agencies concerning investigations dating to the early 1990s. The records sought include FBI materials relating to Tinubu and interview records covering the 1992–1993 period.
The case also touches on a 1993 civil forfeiture proceeding involving funds held in an account in Tinubu’s name. A US federal court document from the litigation identifies the forfeiture case as United States v. Funds in Account 263226700 Held by First Heritage Bank in the Name of Bola Tinubu.
On August 28, 2026, Tinubu’s lawyers filed a response opposing Greenspan’s request for broader disclosure of the records. The legal team argued that Tinubu retained privacy interests in investigative files even where some information concerning the forfeiture proceedings had previously become public.
The FBI has also submitted records connected to the 1993 investigation to Judge Howell for confidential review. The documents were submitted under seal and were not released publicly or provided to Greenspan at that stage.
Greenspan, however, maintains that Tinubu’s previous political position makes the privacy argument particularly questionable and said he was surprised that such a claim had allegedly been presented before an American judge.
