Alleged US drug trafficking: Tinubu’s record’ll be disclosed but important aspect hidden – Ejimakor

Special Counsel to Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Aloy Ejimakor, on Tuesday said President Bola Tinubu’s records relating to alleged drug trafficking in the United States, US, would be disclosed, but some important aspects would be redacted.

Ejimakor explained that only details with little or no political value would be made public.

He made the remark in response to a US federal court permitting an ex parte review of sensitive records regarding Tinubu in an ongoing Freedom of Information Act, FOIA, lawsuit.

However, Ejimakor said the FBI’s request for an ex parte review underscores the additional issue that public justification itself could compromise these protected interests.

Grant Kanu presidential amnesty – Oluwo to President Tinubu

Ogun community raises alarm over alleged destruction of farmlands by land grabbers, begs Gov Abiodun to intervene

2027: Atiku clarifies fuel subsidy position after aide’s ‘restore, remove later’ comment

In a statement he issued, titled: “Analysing FBI’s stonewall on President Tinubu’s US records,” Ejimakor said: “By a recent application filed at the U.S. District Court, the FBI asked the Court for leave to explain, under seal, why releasing certain records regarding President Tinubu could endanger the physical safety of individuals and expose sensitive law enforcement methods.

“Below is a summary of the possible reasons, and justifications, for the FBI’s endangerment claim.

“Under US FOIA Exemption 7(F), 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(F), agencies like the FBI may withhold law enforcement records if disclosure ‘could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual.’

“Courts require only a reasonable expectation of harm, not certainty. See Pub. Emps. for Envtl. Responsibility v. U.S. Section, Int’l Boundary & Water Comm’n, 740 F.3d 195, 206 (D.C. Cir. 2014).”

Ejimakor said the factual reasons the FBI might adduce to justify its endangerment claim include revealing the identities or details of confidential informants, cooperating witnesses or third parties linked to the 1990s drug-trafficking probe and exposing them or their relatives to retaliation from remaining network members.

He added: “Identifying law-enforcement personnel whose names appear in the files poses risk of harassment or physical targeting.

“Disclosing operational details that, even decades later, could enable retaliation against sources still living or associated with the investigation.

“To be sure, US federal courts routinely uphold such withholdings to protect informants and agents. See, e.g., Hammouda v. OIP, 920 F. Supp. 2d 16, 26 (D.D.C. 2013); Rugiero v. DOJ, 257 F.3d 534, 552 (6th Cir. 2001).

“In particular, the FBI’s request for ex parte review underscores the additional issue that public justification itself could compromise these protected interests.

“My prediction: In the end, Tinubu’s records will be disclosed, but significant portions will be redacted, hidden from view, leaving only details that will be of little or no political value.”