Former presidential aide, Reno Omokri, has defended President Bola Tinubu’s opposition to the public release of records held by the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), arguing that the existence of files bearing the President’s name does not amount to having a criminal record.
Omokri made the clarification in a statement posted on X on Monday while reacting to the controversy surrounding Tinubu’s legal efforts to prevent the release of unredacted records held by the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
He maintained that Tinubu had no criminal record in the United States, Nigeria or elsewhere, insisting that FBI records could contain information collected for purposes unrelated to criminal investigations.
“President Bola Tinubu has no criminal record in the United States, Nigeria, or anywhere else, and the FBI has not provided any criminal record on the President to anyone because none exists. Yes, FBI records may contain his name, but they are NOT criminal records,” Omokri said.
According to him, the FBI maintains extensive records on individuals who have never committed crimes, including foreign nationals who undergo background checks while applying for US visas or other immigration-related processes.
He explained that the FBI conducts background screenings on behalf of the US Department of State and the Department of Homeland Security, meaning that an individual’s name could appear in government databases without indicating criminal conduct.
“Thus, as a US citizen or resident, or even as a foreign national, if your name is run through the FBI databases, it is likely to bring up hundreds of pages of records. This does not mean that the records are criminal. In most cases, they will be benign,” he said.
Omokri further argued that such files could contain sensitive personal information, including biometric, biographical and financial details.
“Such records may include personal biometric, biographical, and financial information, such as fingerprints, DNA, bank statements, and other private records,” he said.
He therefore questioned whether Nigerians would want their private records made available to political opponents simply because they were public figures.
“Would you, as an individual, want your private records released to your political opponents, even if they were non-criminal?” he asked.
The former presidential aide also claimed that US authorities had previously cleared Tinubu of criminal wrongdoing.
He referred to correspondence he said was exchanged between the US Embassy and Nigeria’s then Inspector-General of Police, Tafa Balogun, in February 2003.
According to Omokri, Balogun had written to the US Embassy requesting information on whether the FBI had any criminal records concerning Tinubu, who was then governor of Lagos State.
He claimed that the embassy responded the following day with what he described as an “all clear” regarding criminal records involving the former governor.
Omokri said his position was also based on his own investigation into Tinubu’s records when he visited Chicago in 2022 as a member of the opposition.
“This was consistent with my findings when I visited Chicago in 2022, as a member of the opposition, to establish the truth about then-Presidential candidate Bola Tinubu’s academic and other records,” he said.
He urged anyone who doubted the authenticity of the correspondence to contact the US Embassy for clarification.
The controversy comes amid an ongoing legal battle in the United States over access to records concerning Tinubu.
Tinubu has asked the United States District Court for the District of Columbia to reject a request seeking the release of his unredacted records held by the FBI and DEA.
His lawyers have argued that the US Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act protect the records from disclosure. They also contend that the request is politically motivated and does not satisfy any recognised public-interest basis under US law.
The case followed a Freedom of Information Act request by American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan, who sought records relating to Tinubu.
The FBI has invoked several FOIA exemptions in resisting the release of portions of the records, including provisions relating to personal privacy, confidential sources, investigative techniques and the safety of individuals.
The controversy surrounding Tinubu’s records in the United States dates back decades and became a major issue during the build-up to the 2023 presidential election.
In 1993, a US District Court in Illinois ordered the forfeiture of $460,000 held in an account linked to Tinubu after US authorities alleged that the funds represented proceeds of narcotics trafficking or were connected to prohibited financial transactions.
The All Progressives Congress argued during the presidential election litigation that the matter was a civil forfeiture proceeding and did not amount to a criminal conviction.
In September 2023, the Presidential Election Petition Court held that the petitioners had failed to establish that Tinubu had been arrested, arraigned, convicted or sentenced in a criminal case in the United States.
Omokri said the historical controversy should not be conflated with the current FBI records dispute or used to portray Tinubu as having a criminal record.
“President Bola Tinubu has no criminal record in the United States, Nigeria, or anywhere else,” he reiterated.
He also urged the public to distinguish between an FBI file and a criminal record, noting that government agencies routinely maintain non-criminal information on individuals.
However, opposition groups have continued to demand the release of the records, arguing that Nigerians have a right to scrutinise information concerning the President’s past.
The African Democratic Congress spokesperson, Bolaji Abdullahi, questioned Tinubu’s opposition to the disclosure, arguing that allowing the records to be released could settle the controversy.
“Why is the President opposing the release of his past records? That is suspicious. The President should allow them (records) to be released to clear himself,” Abdullahi said.
Similarly, the Nigeria Democratic Congress National Publicity Secretary, Osa Director, argued that Nigerians deserved transparency regarding the President’s past and urged him to allow the records to be made public.
The ongoing US case, however, concerns access to government records under the Freedom of Information Act and does not, by itself, amount to a criminal prosecution or establish that Tinubu committed a drug-trafficking offence.