Get real time updates directly on you device, subscribe now.
The United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), has confirmed that president Bola Tinubu is regarded as an active asset by the agency.
This latest revelation was disclosed in a joint filing by the CIA, FBI, and DEA opposing the release of unredacted information about Mr Tinubu’s background.
Recall that president Bola Tinubu during the last election, was in the eye of the storm after he failed to provide accurate information about his family and educational background.
Nigerian born investigative journalist, David Hundeyin, who orchestrated efforts for full transparency, stated that the agencies submitted a memorandum citing Tinubu’s status as a CIA asset.
He said intelligence operatives argued that exposing such information could compromise United States national security interests.
The CIA memorandum stressed the potential risks associated with confirming or denying Tinubu’s involvement with the agency.
“Human sources can be expected to furnish information to the CIA only when they are confident the CIA can and will do everything in its power to prevent the public disclosure of their cooperation,” read an excerpt from the memorandum.
It further warned that exposing Tinubu’s potential ties could endanger both him and his contacts, warning that “official confirmation of that cooperation could cause the targets to take retaliatory action.”
Related Posts
Also, in addition to the CIA’s statements, the DEA argued that while Nigerians deserve transparency from their government, they do not have the right to unrestricted access to their president’s personal background.
“We oppose full, unredacted disclosure of the DEA’s Bola Tinubu heroin trafficking investigation records because… they do not have a right to know what their president is up to,” the agency stated.
However, Hundeyin has expressed frustration with the US’s role in African governance, accusing American intelligence of bolstering “terrible leaders” and contributing to regional instability.
The case highlights the complexities of international transparency, national security, and public accountability, especially where sensitive intelligence relationships intersect with public scrutiny.
