Reno Omokri has waded into the controversy surrounding President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s records with US federal agencies, arguing that the existence of FBI documents concerning an individual does not necessarily mean those documents contain evidence of criminal activity.
The former presidential aide made the argument as a legal battle continues in the United States over attempts to obtain unredacted records concerning Tinubu from the FBI and DEA.
According to Omokri, federal agencies in the United States maintain extensive databases containing information on people who may have undergone official background checks or interacted with government systems.
He said such records can be generated even when the person involved has never been convicted of a crime.
Omokri Defends Tinubu
Omokri said Tinubu has no criminal record in the United States, Nigeria or elsewhere, adding that the FBI’s possession of information bearing the President’s name should not automatically be treated as proof of wrongdoing.
He explained that records generated during government background checks may contain information that is entirely non-criminal.
The former aide also raised concerns about privacy.
According to him, government records can contain highly sensitive personal information, including biographical, biometric and financial details.
He therefore asked whether Nigerians would support the release of their own private records to political opponents simply because those records happened to be held by a government agency.
Claim About US Embassy Letter
Omokri also drew attention to a document he said relates to an exchange between Nigeria’s former Inspector-General of Police, Tafa Balogun, and the US Embassy in February 2003.
He said Balogun had contacted the embassy to seek information about whether the FBI had criminal records concerning Tinubu, who was serving as Lagos State governor at the time.
Omokri claimed that the embassy subsequently responded and cleared Tinubu of criminal wrongdoing.
He said anyone who doubts the document should approach the US Embassy for clarification.
These claims remain part of Omokri’s defence of the President and should be distinguished from findings that may ultimately emerge from the current US litigation.
What Is Happening in the US Court?
The controversy has intensified because Tinubu is currently challenging efforts to obtain unredacted records held by US federal agencies.
His lawyers have asked the US District Court for the District of Columbia to reject the request for disclosure.
The legal team has relied on provisions of the US Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act, arguing that the requested material is protected from disclosure.
They have also argued that the request is politically motivated and focused on Tinubu because of his position as Nigeria’s President.
The request for the records was made by American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan.
The FBI has relied on various FOIA exemptions when resisting disclosure of portions of the material. Those exemptions include protections relating to individual privacy, confidential sources, investigative procedures and personal safety.
The 1993 Forfeiture Case
The wider controversy is also linked to events dating back to Tinubu’s years in the United States.
In 1993, a US federal court in Illinois ordered the forfeiture of about $460,000 held in an account linked to Tinubu following allegations by US authorities concerning narcotics proceeds or prohibited financial transactions.
However, the proceeding was a civil forfeiture case, not a criminal conviction.
The distinction has been repeatedly highlighted by Tinubu’s political supporters, including the All Progressives Congress, during previous election-related controversies.
A Debate That Continues
The dispute over Tinubu’s US records has become another flashpoint in Nigeria’s political debate.
Supporters of the President argue that records maintained by American agencies should not automatically be interpreted as proof of criminal conduct, while critics continue to demand greater transparency over documents they believe could shed light on Tinubu’s past.
The ongoing court case could determine what additional information, if any, becomes publicly accessible.
Until the legal process is concluded, claims about the contents of unreleased or redacted records should be treated carefully.
Omokri’s latest intervention has nevertheless added another dimension to the debate by focusing attention on the difference between having a government file and having a criminal record.
