PFIPC Scandal: Adeyemi Reveals How ₦1.3 Billion Made It Into 2026 Budget

• Self-styled DG says he lobbied Budget Office officials but denies paying bribes; Reps begin probe as Head of Service, CBN disown agency

LAGOS, Nigeria – The self-styled Director-General of the alleged Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC), Prince Adeniyi Matthew Adeyemi, has explained how the agency was captured in the Federal Government’s 2026 budget, despite his arrest before the appropriation process was concluded.

Adeyemi made the claims in an interview with social media influencer Martins Vincent Otse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan, in a recording released shortly after his arrest. He said the Chief of Staff to the President, Mr Femi Gbajabiamila, had no hand in the N1.3 billion budgetary allocation, adding that he personally approached top Budget Office officials for the agency’s inclusion. He noted that the process was not completed before his arrest, saying he was surprised to later discover that the proposed agency had appeared in the budget.

The PFIPC scandal has drawn nationwide attention after it emerged that about ₦1.3 billion was allocated to the agency under Budget Code 0111062001 in the 2026 Appropriation Act, despite the Presidency disowning the council as fictitious and without legal backing. The allocation comprised ₦802.98 million for personnel costs, ₦200 million for overheads, and ₦300 million for capital projects.

Adeyemi said he visited the Budget Office in December 2024 to seek inclusion of the agency in the 2025 Appropriation Bill but was informed that the budget process had already closed. “I went to that Budget Office for the 2025 budget. I submitted the letter and everything that I wanted, but I was told it was already late. When the 2025 budget came out and I didn’t see it, they told me it would now be for the 2026 budget. We kept in touch because they said it would be considered later,” he said.

He alleged that a female official helped him gain access to the office of the Director-General of Budget Office before he was referred to another director. “She helped me to see the oga. Oga now said, ‘Where is my shini?’ I said I don’t have any shini. He later asked me to meet one director,” he said. The director informed him that the proposal could no longer be accommodated in the 2025 budget but assured him that efforts would continue towards the 2026 appropriation. “They were trying for me that maybe they would include it, but unfortunately they said it could not be included in the 2025 budget. They said it would be for 2026,” he stated.

READ ALSO:

• Petrol Tanker Rams into Vehicles Near UniAbuja Gate, Many Feared Dead
• 2027: We Have Written Agreement Obi Will Serve Only One Term — Kwankwaso
• Court Upholds FCCPC’s Powers to Regulate Nigeria’s N400 Billion Digital Lending Market

Asked whether he paid any Budget Office official, Adeyemi said he only promised officials some favours on execution of the deal. “Honestly, I did not pay any money. I didn’t pay anybody. The only thing I promised was that if I started employing people, I could help them with employment opportunities,” he said. He admitted promising future favours to some officials but insisted no cash exchanged hands during his interactions at the Budget Office. “That was the favour I promised them. I did not give anybody money. It was just a promise that if they had people, I could employ them later,” he said.

According to Adeyemi, the process ended immediately after his arrest because his legal troubles overtook every other plan. He said: “Immediately there was a problem, everything stopped. Even the woman that wanted to help was calling but she couldn’t reach me. I told her to let everything stop. I didn’t even know until they said it was inside the budget. I had already left the office. Where would I still pursue the budget when I was already facing the court?” When the interviewer suggested officials might have inserted the agency into the budget after his arrest, Adeniyi said he could not explain how it happened. “I don’t know because once that problem started, everything stopped. Why would I still pursue the budget when I was already in trouble?” he said.

On allegations that he paid N400 million to facilitate his appointment, Adeniyi claimed the money was delivered in United States dollars through his late associate, Dolapo Tanimola, and that he was not sure if it was delivered to Gbajabiamila. Asked the denomination of the money, he replied, “Dollars.” Asked who received it, he answered, “Dolapo.” Adeyemi also denied ever meeting the President’s Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila, despite alleging that money was sent through Tanimola. Speaking further during the interview released on Tuesday, Adeyemi declared that he never met Gbajabiamila physically before or after his appointment. He said Tanimola acted as the intermediary throughout the process and facilitated the alleged N400 million payment made in dollars. “I never met Gbajabiamila physically before and after he was appointed. Dolapo Tanimola handled everything for me,” Adeniyi said.

Meanwhile, the House of Representatives Ad-hoc Committee investigating the PFIPC, on Tuesday heard testimonies from the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation (OHCSF) and the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), with both institutions distancing themselves from creation and operation of the council. The Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Mrs. Didi Esther Walson-Jack, told the committee that her office had no constitutional responsibility to establish government agencies. “The approval and establishment of agencies is not within the purview of the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation. However, the OHCSF is responsible for approving the administrative structure of federal government agencies,” she said.

The Presidency had said the PFIPC is not a recognised government agency and that Adeyemi forged documents to present himself as an appointee and head of the agency. The Presidential Economic Advisory Council (PEAC) was established by former President Muhammadu Buhari and included prominent Nigerian economists, but the council has ceased to exist since President Bola Tinubu assumed office. Reports from the National Assembly suggest that PFIPC officials never appeared before the Senate Committee on Establishment and Public Service Matters, the body ordinarily responsible for vetting agencies before their budgets are approved. The allocation is said to have entered through a backdoor arrangement without budget defence.

The Senate has resolved to await the outcome of an investigation by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) before taking action on the controversy. President Bola Tinubu has directed the ICPC to investigate the entire scandal and report back within 30 days. The House of Representatives has also launched its own investigations into the matter.

PFIPC Scandal: Adeyemi Reveals How ₦1.3 Billion Made It Into 2026 Budget

Court Upholds FCCPC’s Powers to Regulate Nigeria’s N400 Billion Digital Lending Market

• Federal High Court dismisses WASPAN suit, affirms FCCPC’s authority to regulate Nigeria’s digital lending industry

LAGOS, Nigeria – The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) has resumed full implementation and enforcement of the Digital, Electronic, Online or Non-Traditional Consumer Lending Regulations, 2025 (DEON Regulations), following a landmark judgment by the Federal High Court in Lagos.

Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa dismissed in its entirety a suit filed by the Wireless Application Service Providers Association of Nigeria (WASPAN), which had challenged the Commission’s authority to issue and enforce the regulations. The court upheld the validity of the DEON Regulations, ruling that they were made pursuant to the FCCPC‘s statutory and constitutional powers and are therefore within the Commission’s legal authority.

The judgment, delivered in Suit No. FHC/L/CS/760/2026, also discharged the interim ex parte order issued on April 15, 2026, which had temporarily restrained the Commission from implementing and enforcing the regulations. The court observed that a statutory regulator should not ordinarily be restrained from performing its lawful statutory duties.

With the legal impediment removed, the FCCPC confirmed that the DEON Regulations are once again fully operational and enforceable, and implementation has resumed with immediate effect. The Commission had suspended implementation immediately after being served with the court’s interim order in April, in compliance with the court’s directive and in keeping with its commitment to the rule of law.

Justice Lewis-Allagoa held that the FCCPC’s regulatory jurisdiction derives from Sections 16(2)(c), 16(3) and 17(2)(d) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), as well as Item 60(a) of the Exclusive Legislative List, which confers economy-wide authority over competition and consumer protection matters. The court further ruled that Sections 104 and 105 of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA), 2018, give the FCCPC precedence in competition and consumer protection issues, while sector regulators retain their technical, licensing, and prudential responsibilities. According to the court, the relationship between the FCCPC and sector regulators is complementary rather than conflicting. “Concurrency means coexistence, not displacement,” the judge held, adding that the DEON Regulations do not usurp the statutory powers of the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) . The court also rejected WASPAN’s contention that the regulations conflicted with the Nigerian Communications Act, 2003, holding that both statutes can be harmoniously construed. It ruled that where competition and consumer protection issues arise, the FCCPA provides the applicable legal framework.

READ ALSO:

• Nigerian Students Make History, Clinch Gold at 2026 Spelling Bee World Cup in China
• Fake Medical Report Scandal: El-Rufai’s Personal Physician Faces MDCAN Panel, Criminal Charges
• NBA election: Lawyers seek court order to halt Badejo-Okusanya’s swearing-in

WASPAN, represented by Senior Advocate of Nigeria Kemi Pinheiro, had argued that airtime lending is a telecommunications value-added service regulated exclusively by the NCC under the Nigerian Communications Act, and that subjecting operators to the FCCPC’s regulatory regime would create dual regulation, increase compliance costs, and undermine the sustainability of the service. The FCCPC, however, maintained that deferred-payment airtime and data services constitute digital consumer lending and therefore fall within its statutory mandate to regulate consumer credit markets and protect consumers.

The judgment is expected to have significant implications for Nigeria’s estimated N400 billion airtime credit industry, where subscribers receive airtime or data in advance and repay later with an associated service charge. Following the ruling, telecommunications operators, including MTN Nigeria, Airtel Nigeria and Globacom, are expected to resume suspension of airtime and data lending services after previously restoring them following the April interim court order. The service, valued at between N300 billion and N400 billion annually, allows subscribers to borrow airtime and data during emergencies and has become particularly important for traders, artisans, small business owners and other low-income earners who depend on uninterrupted mobile connectivity. Industry analysts estimate that approximately 40 million people use airtime credit services regularly, with the vast majority at the base of the economy.

Reacting to the judgment, the FCCPC’s Director of Corporate Affairs, Ondaje Ijagwu, said the Commission welcomed the court’s decision, describing it as a reaffirmation of its statutory mandate. “The Commission has always maintained that the rule of law is fundamental to effective regulation and good governance. When the Court issued its interim order, we immediately suspended implementation of the Regulations in full compliance with the Court’s directive. Now that the Court has affirmed the validity of the DEON Regulations and delivered judgment in favour of the Commission, we will continue to discharge our statutory responsibilities faithfully, professionally and in accordance with the law,” he said. Ijagwu said the DEON Regulations are designed to promote responsible lending, strengthen regulatory accountability, curb unfair and exploitative practices, and enhance consumer protection in Nigeria’s digital lending market. “Our objective has always been to ensure that innovation and financial inclusion flourish within a transparent, fair and accountable regulatory framework that inspires confidence among consumers, investors and responsible operators alike,” he added.

The FCCPC introduced the DEON Regulations on July 21, 2025, requiring all digital lenders, including loan apps and online credit providers, to register with the Commission and meet clear standards on consumer protection, data privacy, ethical loan terms, and responsible lending. The framework expanded regulatory oversight beyond app-based lenders to include digital and non-traditional consumer lending platforms, strengthening the FCCPC’s authority to monitor the industry and enforce compliance. The regulations target all digital, online, or non-traditional consumer loans, including unsecured cash loans, airtime credit, data loans, cashback schemes, and barter schemes where a verifiable monetary value is exchanged. They also apply to fintechs, mobile money operators, agritech platforms, and cross-state vendors, even if they hold other state or federal licenses. Operators were given a compliance window until January 5, 2026, with sanctions for non-compliance that include fines of up to N100 million or 1% of turnover, and possible disqualification of directors, as well as other enforcement actions such as suspension or revocation of approval.

The FCCPC’s regulatory crackdown has yielded significant results. The Commission has previously delisted several loan applications from digital platforms and sanctioned operators accused of violating consumer rights. Nigeria has experienced rapid growth in digital lending over the past decade, driven by smartphone adoption, limited access to traditional bank credit and increasing demand for instant consumer loans. However, the sector has also attracted widespread criticism over practices including public shaming of borrowers, unauthorised access to phone contacts, hidden charges and aggressive debt collection methods. The judgment effectively restores regulatory certainty for licensed digital lending operators while increasing compliance pressure on firms that previously operated with limited oversight. The ruling is expected to accelerate the professionalisation of Nigeria’s digital lending market by discouraging rogue operators while creating a more predictable regulatory environment for responsible fintech companies. For investors, the ruling provides greater regulatory clarity over one of Africa’s fastest-growing fintech segments. For consumers, it revives protections that had been temporarily suspended while the legal dispute was before the court.

Court Upholds FCCPC’s Powers to Regulate Nigeria’s N400 Billion Digital Lending Market