BREAKING: US Exposes Three Drug Cases Linked to Tinubu
American journalist and transparency activist Aaron Greenspan has identified at least three separate United States cases connected to a drug-trafficking investigation from the 1990s involving Nigerian President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and businessman Abiodun Agbele.
Greenspan also raised the possibility of a fourth case involving Tinubu, potentially a criminal indictment filed under seal, but stressed that he has no conclusive evidence that such an indictment exists.
He made the disclosure in an exclusive interview with Laolu Akande, founder of Empowered Newswire, published on Wednesday.
The revelations are linked to Greenspan’s ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, in which he is seeking historical FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) records concerning investigations involving Tinubu and Agbele.
The case, Greenspan v. Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01816-BAH, is a civil dispute over access to government records and is not a criminal prosecution of Tinubu.
According to Greenspan, the three known cases include a series of criminal indictments issued in 1992 against alleged members of the drug network, a separate criminal case involving Agbele, and a 1993 civil forfeiture proceeding involving approximately $460,000 held in an account in Tinubu’s name.
“There’s at least three known cases now that are tied to this drug ring,” Greenspan said.
“There is the 1992 set of criminal indictments, which is where this transcript comes from, and that’s available in the National Archives. There’s the unknown date indictment of Mr Agbele, and then there’s the civil forfeiture case, which involves Bola Tinubu.”
Possible fourth case
Greenspan said the historical records have also raised questions about whether there may have been another case involving Tinubu personally.
“There could be a fourth. There could be a criminal indictment of Bola Tinubu as well, and that’s what we’re trying to do,” he said.
However, Greenspan emphasised that he has not established that such an indictment exists.
“I don’t have any evidence that such a deal had been made, to be very clear,” he said while discussing the possibility of a sealed proceeding. “That remains an open question right now.”
He said the possibility arose partly from the level of detail contained in some of the historical investigative materials he has reviewed, including references to bank accounts, Tinubu’s wife, possible involvement by his mother, and details concerning a Nissan vehicle and its vehicle identification number.
“It is very detailed. Yet, at the end of all this excruciating detail, nothing happens,” Greenspan said.
He suggested that one possible explanation could be that US authorities investigated the matter but ultimately decided not to prosecute, while another possibility is that a criminal case was filed but remains sealed.
Greenspan, however, did not provide evidence proving that a sealed criminal indictment against Tinubu exists.
Agbele and alleged heroin investigation
Greenspan said Agbele was connected to the same historical investigation and was described in records as the nephew of Mueez Akande, whom Greenspan identified as a Chicago-based figure allegedly involved in facilitating heroin distribution from Thailand and other parts of Asia through Nigeria.
According to Greenspan, Tinubu’s alleged connection to the investigation was financial rather than direct involvement in heroin distribution.
“Bola Tinubu comes into this because he was not distributing heroin directly. He was (accused of) laundering money for the proceeds from the heroin distribution,” he said.
Greenspan cited testimony from DEA Special Agent Vincent Balbo in a criminal proceeding involving Lee Andrew Edwards.
He said Balbo testified that Agbele had supplied heroin to Edwards’ organisation and that the drugs originated from Nigeria.
Historical material relating to the investigation has also been cited in Greenspan’s FOIA filings. According to reports based on those filings, Balbo testified that Agbele had been arrested and indicted.
Greenspan said searches of the US federal court records system, PACER, have not located a publicly accessible criminal case involving Agbele, leading him to question whether some related records could remain sealed.
The Edwards case itself was a criminal prosecution. Edwards was convicted of operating a heroin-trafficking organisation in Gary, Indiana, during the late 1980s and early 1990s.
The existence of that prosecution, however, does not by itself establish criminal wrongdoing by Tinubu.
The $460,000 forfeiture case
The third case identified by Greenspan is a 1993 civil forfeiture proceeding involving approximately $460,000 held in an account in Tinubu’s name.
Greenspan’s court filings cite an October 4, 1993 decree of forfeiture issued by the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
The proceeding involved funds claimed by Tinubu and other individuals and ended with the money being forfeited to the United States.
Court records cited in the FOIA litigation described the funds as proceeds of narcotics trafficking or money involved in transactions prohibited under US law.
However, the proceeding was a civil forfeiture case and did not constitute a criminal conviction of Tinubu. The records indicate that the United States and individual claimants agreed to settle and compromise the action.
The Nigerian Presidency has also repeatedly highlighted this distinction.
In September, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy Bayo Onanuga said the Washington litigation was a civil FOIA records dispute and “not a criminal case against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.”
He also said the court had not found Tinubu guilty of criminal wrongdoing.
What Greenspan is seeking
Greenspan’s lawsuit followed multiple FOIA requests submitted in 2022 and 2023 to US agencies, including the FBI, DEA, CIA, Internal Revenue Service and the Executive Office for US Attorneys.
The requests sought records relating to a joint investigation into a Chicago-area heroin-trafficking and money-laundering network that allegedly operated during the late 1980s and early 1990s.
Tinubu, Agbele, Edwards and Mueez Adegboyega Akande were among the individuals identified in the requests.
The FBI and DEA initially responded with what is known as a “Glomar response,” under which an agency neither confirms nor denies whether responsive records exist.
However, in an April 8, 2025 ruling, US District Judge Beryl Howell ruled that the agencies could no longer rely on that response for the records at issue after considering Greenspan’s arguments concerning previous official disclosures.
The litigation has since continued over which records should be released and what information may legally remain redacted or withheld.
The Presidency said in September that the FBI and DEA had released 399 pages of records, with portions withheld or redacted under statutory exemptions covering areas including grand-jury material, confidential sources, investigative techniques and personal privacy.
Tinubu has also intervened in the case and invoked privacy protections over some of the records.
Greenspan’s separate cyberattack claims
The FOIA litigation has also expanded to include Greenspan’s allegations concerning repeated cyberattacks against PlainSite, the legal research website he operates.
In a September 9 filing, Greenspan asked Judge Howell for permission to serve six written questions, four requests for admission and a document request on Tinubu.
He also sought a subpoena requiring DCI Group AZ, a Washington public-affairs firm registered as an agent of the Nigerian government, to produce documents.
Greenspan has not accused Tinubu of ordering the alleged attacks, and no court has found that Tinubu, the Nigerian government or DCI Group was responsible.
He said the attacks coincided with significant developments in the FOIA litigation and at times disrupted access to PlainSite.
His filing also referenced an August 5 social-media post from an account called “Secure Nigeria,” which described him as an opposition-linked figure. Greenspan said a major cyberattack began the following day.
He acknowledged, however, that the timing alone does not establish who was responsible for the attacks.
