What started as the Presidency’s attempt to dismiss the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) as a fictitious organisation has snowballed into a far wider controversy over the integrity of Nigeria’s public institutions.
It has also ignited a number of questions on how an agency declared non-existent could purportedly operate within government circles and feature in the 2026 Appropriation Act with a N1.3 billion allocation.
Opposition leaders, lawyers, civil society groups and former senior government officials yesterday intensified calls for an independent investigation warning that the affair has become a test of the Tinubu administration’s commitment to transparency and accountability.
The Presidency has dismissed Adeniyi Adeyemi as an impostor and absolved Chief of Staff Femi Gbajabiamila of bribery allegations but the central question has shifted.
It is no longer just about whether Adeyemi forged documents, but whether Nigeria’s governance systems have weaknesses that are significant enough for a fictitious institution to pass through several layers of official scrutiny.
Chronologically, the Presidency’s account suggests that concerns first surfaced in October 2025 when the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission (NIPC) complained that PFIPC’s activities conflicted with its statutory mandate.
The Presidency said Gbajabiamila had petitioned the police and Department of State Services (DSS) immediately, calling the outfit fraudulent. Adeyemi was later arrested and investigators reportedly recovered fake documents. The police decided that both the council and his appointment were fake.
Usually such an explanation would have settled the matter. Rather, fresh questions arose because the same council later featured in the 2026 Appropriation Act with an allocation of over N1.3 billion for personnel, overheads and capital expenditure. This turned the controversy from a supposed criminal case to a governance conundrum.
What matters most is not the allegation of bribery. It is, rather, the budgetary trail.
There is no one person who produces Nigeria’s budget. Proposals are usually initiated by the relevant institution before any agency can get an allocation, examined by the Budget Office, approved by the Executive in the Federal Executive Council, thoroughly scrutinized by committees in both chambers of the National Assembly and finally signed into law by the President.
The implications are that if the Presidency insists that PFIPC never legally existed, then one of Nigeria’s most fundamental public finance processes appears to have failed, as stakeholders pointed to implications far beyond this particular controversy.
The question of institutional validation is equally overlooked, for Adeyemi was not simply making press statements. Public records show meetings with the Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives, meetings with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), consultations with the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC), and plans for a World Investment Summit.
He stated that the council also maintained office space in the Federal Secretariat, operated bank accounts through the CBN and got recognition from the Office of the Head of the Civil Service.
How scandal reveals holes in National Assembly oversight
One institution that could be responsible for a lot, perhaps most, of the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) scandal is the current bicameral National Assembly led by Senate President Godswill Akpabio.
Right from the beginning, and perhaps because of the way he emerged as the first among equals in the federal parliament, Akpabio left no one in doubt that under his watch, the line of oversight between the Executive and the Legislature could fade into near insignificance.
The Akpabio-led National Assembly seemed to have positioned itself to be in close tandem with the Bola Ahmed Tinubu administration when, during the first appearance of the President to present the 2024 Appropriation Bill, lawmakers replaced the national anthem with the campaign song of President Tinubu, “On Your Mandate, We Shall Stand.”
The 10th National Assembly, having opted to stand on the President’s mandate, seemed to have effectively abdicated its constitutional role as a check on the Executive. The Legislature, in addition to legislating, is also responsible for ensuring that the Executive acts in accordance with the rule of law and that the behavior of the Executive is transparent and accountable.
On June 25, 2026, during a press conference, Prince Adeyemi alleged that Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, received N400 million through a proxy and later demanded another N200 million to facilitate his appointment as the Director of the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council.
Adeyemi also claimed that he turned down a request by the Chief of Staff for 48 per cent of the PFIPC’s proposed N27.4 billion take-off grant.
Reacting to the Chief of Staff’s denial of the existence of the council, Adeyemi said he was dismayed that Gbajabiamila could make a “disclaimer distancing the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President from the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC), alongside the Presidential Economic Advisory Council (PEAC).
He said: “My name’s been swept into this storm. I completely reject any attempt to reduce this to mere denials without answering the fundamental questions that Nigerians are now posing.
“The problem is no longer personalities. It is about contradictions that require responses.
It is derisory to hear the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila claim that he does not know about the existence of the agency as in the real world he should cover his face in shame.
“If Femi Gbajabiamila, who is supposed to be the Chief of Staff to the President and also the administrative gateway to the Presidency can make such an administrative error by allowing the President to sign a document containing a fake agency, he should possibly resign his appointment now.
The National Assembly also came under fire when the chief executive of the contested council asked: “How did the agency’s name get into the 2026 Appropriation Bill on pages 50 and 51? If the agency does not exist but has found its way into the Nigerian national budget, it means the entire 2026 appropriation budget is fraudulent and should be discarded.
“What the Chief of Staff to the President is now saying by his denial, which has been published in various national dailies, is that our 109 distinguished senators, among whom are seasoned administrators, former governors and diverse professional experts, were incompetent to detect the fake agency in the national budget.
“What it means is that our 360 House members are just rubber stamps, as has been rumored. This is not about feelings. It is procedural because the national budget is not presented in isolation. It weaves through many levels of technical drafting, executive coordination, ministerial inputs, Budget Office review and ultimately, legislative scrutiny by both chambers of the National Assembly…”
Ex-SGF questions how fake agency worked without executive knowledge
FORMER Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), David Babachir Lawal, has challenged assertions that a government agency could be operating in the federal bureaucracy without the knowledge of the executive.
“It is not normal for any organisation to be a government agency without going through established administrative processes,” Lawal said.
“If you’re asking me whether an agency of government can function without executive input, I don’t know how it can be done, because all those agencies report to the Office of the Secretary to the Government. The Secretary to Government signs letters of appointment. The Office of the Secretary to the Government allocates offices for MDAs.
“So, I don’t know this government, their own style is different. But when I was there all appointment letters were signed by the SGF after the approval of the President. The President approves and directs you to sign the letters. “They come to the agencies, they come to you, they ask for office allocation and you allocate the office and so on and so forth.”
On whether the National Assembly could approve budgetary provisions without knowing whether such agencies existed, the former SGF explained that budgets are first compiled by ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs), presented by the Budget Office at the Federal Executive Council (FEC) and later defended by the MDAs.
“Normally, budgets are all lumped under the supervising minister and then he comes to defend them. In many cases, even before it gets there, all MDAs defend their budgets before the Minister of Budget and Planning.
So, there are processes. I do not know how it can be done without the SGF knowing or the Federal Executive Council knowing. After every MDA must have defended the budget before the Budget Office, the President forwards the budget to the National Assembly after approval by the Federal Executive Council.
“When you see a line in the budget that doesn’t have an owner, you start to wonder. But this is a different government. Their whole style is different. So I don’t know how they do it.”
Lawal said the President has the power to award contracts without the input of the National Assembly, but such contracts must be backed by appropriated funds.
This government, their way of doing things is different. The President is the Executive President. I don’t know what he can do. “The National Assembly does not interfere in the awarding of contracts. What happens is, if the President awards a contract that has no money appropriated for it, that is an impeachable offense in the government I served in. But I don’t know now,” he said.
Atiku wants independent probe, says Presidency’s defence self-indicting
PRESIDENTIAL candidate of the African Democratic Congress, Atiku Abubakar, has described the presidency’s response to allegations against the chief of staff to the president, Femi Gbajabiamila, over the scandalous activities of the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council and its director general, Adeniyi Adeyemi, as self-indicting.
Atiku made this known in a statement by his spokesman, Phrank Shaibu, yesterday.
Atiku said the desperate attempt by the presidency to explain away the scandal surrounding the so-called PFIPC has inadvertently exposed a far more disturbing reality under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration.
He said the reaction by presidential spokesperson, Bayo Onanuga, was not a defence of the government but a public confession of institutional collapse.
He said the allegations were too serious to be ignored and called for an urgent investigation into all parties involved, including the Central Bank of Nigeria and the National Assembly.
“There is an African proverb that says that ‘the man who points at the moon should not have blood on his finger.’ A government cannot claim to be exposing fraud while struggling to explain how that same fraud found its way to the very heart of the Nigerian state.
“What the presidency intended as damage control has turned into self-indictment. Instead of putting out the fire, it has shown how deeply the flames have eaten away at the foundations of governance.
“The Presidency now expects Nigerians to believe that one private citizen single-handedly forged presidential documents; impersonated senior government officials; set up an office within the Federal Secretariat; allegedly opened dozens of bank accounts – even accounts with government identities; hosted foreign ambassadors without diplomatic clearance; obtained official recognition in several government circles; and all but embedded a phantom agency into the machinery of government, without a single insider helping him. That explanation requires more faith than the scandal.
“There’s another African proverb that’s just as timeless: ‘When termites eat a tree from the inside, it looks perfect until the first storm comes.’ The false agency scandal is that storm. What Nigerians have seen is not just the exposure of an alleged impostor, but the exposure of institutions that have been hollowed out through years of negligence, incompetence, and impunity.
“Even more troubling is the glaring contradiction the presidency has failed to explain.
“On the one hand it claims that the PFIPC never existed and was nothing but a complex scam. Conversely, public records allegedly show that about N1.3 billion was allocated to the same council in the 2026 Appropriation Act, alongside the Presidential Economic Advisory Council.
“This contradiction is too huge to be ignored.
“If the agency was fictional, who wrote the budget estimates with its name? Who submitted them to which department? Who were the officials who defended these estimates before the National Assembly? What committees examined them? Who voted for them? Who put the “appropriate” in the appropriation bill? And who signed that budget into law?”
He added: “So we call for a genuinely independent investigation that follows the evidence wherever it may lead. There are no sacred cows. No political immunity. No justice for some.”
Afenifere: FG can’t investigate itself, demands independent probe
THE Yoruba socio-cultural organisation, Afenifere, loyalist of the late Chief Ayo Adebanjo, yesterday, said it had little confidence in the Federal Government’s readiness to probe allegations against the President’s Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila, insisting that the administration “cannot investigate itself.”
The group called for an independent, transparent and evidence-based investigation into the allegations, along with anti-corruption campaigners and civic organisations, warning that any attempt to ignore or suppress the issue could damage public confidence in the government’s anti-corruption credentials.
Prince Justice Faloye, Afenifere’s National Publicity Secretary, speaking on the matter in his personal capacity to The Guardian, said the allegations against Gbajabiamila were not unexpected, alleging that they were in line with a pattern of misconduct.
Faloye alleged the Chief of Staff had become “the face of corruption” in President Bola Tinubu’s administration and insisted Nigerians should not expect the Federal Government to carry out a credible investigation.
“I doubt the Chief of Staff would have the audacity to engage in such actions without having the backing of powerful interests within the system,” he alleged.
He said any serious investigation is unlikely to be done within the government unless civil society organisations, the media and other accountability institutions pressurise the government.
He said the only way it could be done was through relentless public scrutiny and advocacy to compel the authorities to institute a credible and transparent probe into the allegations.
Debo Adeniran, Chairman of the Centre for Anti-Corruption and Open Leadership (CACOL) also reacted, calling on the government to probe the allegations in the interest of transparency, accountability and rule of law.
He cautioned that shielding the Chief of Staff from investigation could be counterproductive, and advised against treating allegations as proof of guilt.
Adeniran said the allegations deserve serious attention but due process must be allowed to run its course.
“There have been some allegations around the development. But mere allegations are not enough. If someone thinks someone was involved, then they need to provide credible evidence.
“The responsibility of law enforcement agencies is to carry out an investigation with due diligence, impartiality and transparency. The bottom line question is: what’s the evidence? Are there documents or physical evidence or credible witnesses who can substantiate the allegations?“he asked.
He stressed that every accused person is innocent until proven guilty no matter what office he holds.
“If there are investigations going on, the authorities should collect all the evidence they can get, including eyewitness testimony where appropriate, and let the facts speak for themselves.”
“Where there is sufficient evidence, the law should be allowed to take its course. Where none exists, no one should be subjected to trial by public opinion.
Some have alleged the government is trying to influence or suppress the process. Such claims should also be looked into. “The investigation should stay open, transparent and evidence-based so the truth can come out and justice can be done,” he added.
In a similar vein, the Yoruba Ronu Leadership Forum called on President Tinubu’s administration not to sweep the allegations under the carpet, even as it asked for a holistic review of alleged irregularities in the budgeting process.
“The allegations of bribery for appointments and demands for kickbacks raise serious questions that should be independently investigated,” said Akin Malaolu, President of the forum in a statement.
The forum acknowledged that Gbajabiamila had denied the allegations, describing them as false and politically motivated, but stressed that the matter should not be resolved with mere denials.
It urged the Federal Government to investigate the allegations in the national interest and prosecute anyone found culpable after due process.
The forum further implored the President to ensure thorough investigations into allegations of budget padding and fraudulent insertions into federal budgets, warning that any manipulation of the nation’s budget is a betrayal of public trust and will not be tolerated.
Lawyers Ask Probe, Say Scandal Is Institutional Failure
“The whole thing is a shame to the country,” said the Convener, Security Situation Room, Mr Douglas Ogbankwa, reacting,
“It is unheard of that an agency functioning from the Federal Secretariat is fake, he said.
‘I have once or twice been to the Federal Secretariat in my life.
If you don’t know who you are, they won’t let you into the structure.
“So, apart from identifying yourself, you must tell them exactly where you are going and who you want to see before they can give you access to the Federal Secretariat. It is in the Three Arms Zone, which is like the green zone of the Federal Government.
“Now imagine someone taking space in the Federal Secretariat, putting the portrait of the President, his own portrait, the coat of arms and the national flag,” he asked.
Ogbankwa said it is not easy for ambassadors to be hosted without a recommendation from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, saying that Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi had the contacts to be involved in those indicated.
He also wondered how the agency got into the national budget and also got Gazetted by the federal government.
“So they need to stop the crap. I think Gbajabiamila should go.
“There are certain things, when you start talking to some of us, you make us feel like we’re fools. We are not stupid. The fact is that he has been caught red-handed,” he said, urging the actors to stop weaving wrong narratives to divert attention.
He said that taking Adeyemi to court is not a problem, but the people involved in the scandal should be identified, investigated and also sanctioned.
He said they were making frantic efforts to sweep the incident under the carpet, warning that a judicial panel of enquiry should be inaugurated to unravel the truth about the incident.
He said: “If an agency can set up 34 bank accounts, set up nine accounts with the Central Bank of Nigeria and can have the Central Bank of Nigeria credited with over N1 billion, it should not be a fake agency.
“They need to get out of the way. Too bad. No country in the world would take us seriously with this sort of thing going on.
“This is a state, not a child’s play. “The role of a state is not a joke, even if you don’t know what you do.
The lawyer said if this is true then there are other fake agencies in the government unknown to the public and those involved should hide their faces in shame.
Abubakar Sani, a Kano-based lawyer, said the scandal was an inside job.
He called it a “conspiracy” of all the relevant agencies (at all levels).
They got owned. You scratch my back… All in violation of their oaths of office under the Constitution (7th Schedule).
Otherwise it would have been quite impossible to execute with such impudence and immunity,” he said.
The senior lawyer said law enforcement and regulatory agencies such as the ICPC, EFCC and the Code of Conduct Bureau had questions to answer for sleeping on their beat.
He asked, “Will they dare to tread on the very big toes obviously involved? Will they give names? Who are the culprits in the system? Who would dare to blow the whistle on them?
“There are more questions than answers in the scandal, obviously. Nigerians are watching and waiting. “Maybe another public interest suit by SERAP (or perhaps an application under FOI) will be the impetus before a semblance of action is taken.”
A Lagos-based lawyer, Mr Stephen Azubuike, who also lamented the unprecedented level of corruption in the ranks of various government agencies, said it makes ugly stories like this believable.
“During a thorough check of this fraudulent scheme, the role of accomplices in the system, who carefully ensured the success of the well-orchestrated criminal venture, will certainly be revealed,” he said.
He said: “With all we have seen in this country, from loads of cash taking lease of apartments to wild animals swallowing funds, the story of Adeyemi Adeniyi is one of those stories, we only wish were fairy tales.
Ex-minister: Presidency’s defence raises more questions than it answers
Former Minister of Youth and Sports, Solomon Dalung, has slammed the Presidency’s defence of the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, over the alleged activities of Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi, saying the official response failed to answer many critical questions.
Dalung was responding to a statement by Presidential spokesman Bayo Onanuga, who tried to clear Gbajabiamila of any involvement in the matter.
Dalung said that despite the attempt by the Presidency to exonerate the Chief of Staff, the explanation was indicative of what he called huge gaps in government oversight.
He explained that irrespective of the outcome of the ongoing court case involving Adeyemi, the Presidency still has an explanation to give to Nigerians on how a purported fictitious presidential agency operated within the government without being detected.
Dalung questioned how someone could allegedly establish a fake government agency, forge an appointment letter, operate from the Federal Secretariat, hire staff, interact with government institutions, meet with diplomats, and reportedly get a Central Bank of Nigeria account without attracting official attention.
He also voiced concern over reports that the alleged agency was in the national budget, noting that budget proposals go through various levels of scrutiny by the executive and legislative branches before they are approved.
“If the council was fake, explain how it entered the budget,” Dalung asked.
He said the Presidency did not explain who initiated the budget provision, who processed it and who approved it during the budget process.
He further queried how the office space was allegedly obtained at the Federal Secretariat and which authority approved the allocation and why the operation was not discovered earlier.
He also said the Presidency nominated Dolapo Babatunde Tanimola, who investigators are said to have identified as the man Prince Adeyemi Adeyemi said helped him to procure the purportedly forged appointment letter before he was said to have died in a hotel fire days before his arrest.
Dalung asked whether the investigators had thoroughly examined the circumstances of Tanimola’s death, including whether there had been an autopsy, coroner’s inquest or whether there had been a forensic analysis of his communications and financial records.
However, Dalung said while the allegations against Adeyemi were now before the court, accountability should not be limited to the prosecution of one person.
He also said the government must explain how its institutions allegedly interacted with, or failed to detect, what the Presidency now calls a fictitious agency.
Dalung called on the Presidency to release documentary evidence, timelines and official records related to the alleged inclusion of the agency in the national budget, its alleged operation within the Federal Secretariat and the apparent failure of institutional safeguards.
CISLAC calls for transparency in the investigation of PFIPC saga
THE Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC) has called for an independent investigation into the alleged activities of Adeniyi Adeyemi, saying the controversy exposes serious institutional failures that threaten public confidence in government.
The statement signed by the Executive Director, Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, said the organisation was worried that Adeyemi operated for years under the guise of heading the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council and the Presidential Economic Advisory Council. The statement alleged Adeyemi operated government offices, bank accounts, employed staff, and interacted with several public institutions before being declared an impostor.
The CISLAC said that if the allegations are confirmed, the scandal goes beyond one individual and reflects a broad failure of administrative controls, due diligence and institutional oversight. It called on the Presidency to facilitate an open and independent investigation into the roles or lack thereof of all agencies and officials who allegedly aided the operation.
The organisation also called for a forensic audit of all accounts and transactions relating to the alleged councils, a review of the procedures governing presidential committees and advisory bodies and sanctions against any public official found to have facilitated or failed to prevent the alleged misconduct. Such incidents should not happen in future and probe should be used to improve governance systems, it said.
Analyst questions PFIPC’s N1.3 billion budget allocation
A PUBLIC affairs commentator, Walter Ononuju Nnadi, has queried an apparent contradiction between the position of the Presidency and the 2026 Appropriation Act on the existence of the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council.
Nnadi argued the issue “raises concerns about transparency, budget accountability and public trust.”
He stated that on the 11th of June 2026, the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, had said that the PFIPC does not exist under the administration of President Bola Tinubu and warned the public to beware of anyone doing business with it.
But Nnadi pointed to the 2026 Appropriation Act which listed the Presidential Economic Advisory Council/Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council under the Presidency with an allocation of about N1.3 billion inclusive of personnel, overhead and capital expenditure.
For him, this discrepancy raises questions as to whether there is an error in the budget or whether the council exists in a certain official capacity despite the disclaimer from the Presidency.
Nnadi also referred to the claims by Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi that the council has official accounts, office space and approved personnel, adding that such claims are worthy of independent verification by the relevant government agencies.
“He urged the Presidency and the Budget Office to make a clear statement on the issue, adding that the resolution of the matter is critical to deepening public confidence in government budgeting and accountability processes.
