The United States District Court for the District of Columbia has rejected a motion by Aaron Greenspan seeking limited discovery from Nigerian President Bola Tinubu and DCI Group in an ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit.
Naija News reports that the development was disclosed on Saturday by Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to President Tinubu on Information and Strategy.
In its ruling dated October 30, the court determined that Greenspan’s proposed discovery concerning alleged cyberattacks on his website was not sufficiently relevant to the underlying FOIA dispute involving the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
The decision means Greenspan’s request to obtain additional information from Tinubu and DCI Group through the proposed discovery process was denied.
Attorney Explains Court’s Decision
Reacting to the ruling, attorney Christopher W. Carmichael said the decision reinforced the need to keep the FOIA proceedings focused on the legal questions before the court.
According to Carmichael, the case could not be used to pursue discovery on matters unrelated to the underlying dispute.
He explained that the denial of the request involving Tinubu and DCI Group underscored the importance of maintaining clear procedural boundaries in the litigation.
The ruling addresses the scope of the requested discovery and its relevance to the FOIA proceedings, rather than determining the merits of the separate allegations concerning the alleged cyberattacks.
Court Rejects Amicus Brief Request
The court also denied a separate application by nonparty Karl Von Batten seeking permission to submit an amicus curiae brief.
An amicus curiae brief is a legal submission made by a person or organisation that is not directly a party to a case but seeks to provide information or arguments that may assist the court.
In addition, the judge rejected Greenspan’s related request for judicial notice, which sought to have certain matters recognised by the court without requiring them to be established through the usual evidentiary process.
The court also denied Greenspan’s motion for summary judgment.
Summary judgment is a procedure through which a court may decide a case, or particular claims, without a full trial when the applicable legal standard is satisfied.
Underlying FOIA Dispute Remains Ongoing
Attorney Oluwole Afolabi also commented on the court’s decisions, noting that the denial of the motions established procedural boundaries for the litigation.
Afolabi said the court had rejected Greenspan’s request for summary judgment and a separate application to introduce an amicus brief.
He added that the underlying FOIA issues remained before the court despite the latest procedural decisions.
The Freedom of Information Act allows members of the public to request access to federal agency records, subject to statutory exemptions and other applicable legal requirements.
In this case, the underlying dispute involves requests concerning records held by the FBI and DEA. The latest ruling focused on the admissibility and relevance of the additional procedures sought by Greenspan.
The decision does not, by itself, resolve the outstanding FOIA questions or establish the truth of the allegations concerning the alleged cyberattacks.
The litigation will therefore continue to be determined by the legal issues properly before the court.