The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has confirmed that President Bola Tinubu was a subject of criminal investigation into drug-trafficking crimes in the early 1990s.
This is according to a sworn declaration filed in a US federal court.
The declaration was lodged on August 28, 2026, before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia as part of an ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case seeking access to FBI records relating to Tinubu.
FBI, in the filing stated that “the responsive records herein were compiled in furtherance of the FBI’s investigation of multiple individuals for drug trafficking crimes.”
The agency also stated that “the court has already determined that an official acknowledgement had been made of an investigation of Bola Tinubu.”
The declaration followed an April 2025 ruling by US District Judge Beryl Howell, who held that the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) could no longer rely on “Glomar” responses to refuse to confirm or deny the existence of records relating to the investigation.
Howell ruled that the agencies had failed to establish sufficient privacy grounds to conceal the fact that Tinubu had been the subject of a criminal investigation.
She ordered the agencies to process non-exempt records sought under FOIA.
Though, the ruling did not establish that Tinubu committed a drug-trafficking offence or that he was convicted of any crime.
The latest declaration relates to FOIA requests filed by American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan.
Among the records sought were the “entire FBI file for Bola Ahmed Tinubu” and FBI 302 interview records involving Tinubu from FBI Case No. 245-IP-71386-UUUUUU between 1992 and 1993.
Greenspan’s requests formed part of a broader effort to obtain records concerning a Chicago heroin-trafficking operation that operated in the early 1990s.
The FBI has continued to withhold portions of the records, citing several FOIA exemptions covering personal privacy, confidential sources, law-enforcement techniques and information whose disclosure could endanger individuals.
The agency said it could not publicly disclose the full basis for its reliance on some of the exemptions.
