Reps Probe ₦1.32 Billion ‘Fake Agency’ Scandal as Critics Slam Gbajabiamila’s Exclusion from Inquiry

Reps Probe ₦1.32 Billion ‘Fake Agency’ Scandal as Critics Slam Gbajabiamila’s Exclusion from Inquiry

The House of Representatives has launched a formal investigation into how an unestablished agency, the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC), secured a ₦1.32 billion allocation in the 2026 Appropriation Act, even as some lawmakers and public affairs analysts question the credibility of the probe over the decision not to invite President Bola Tinubu’s Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila.

Speaker Tajudeen Abbas inaugurated the ad hoc committee today at the National Assembly Complex in Abuja, with the panel scheduled to hold its first public hearing in line with Sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution, which empower the National Assembly to investigate matters relating to public institutions and the management of public funds . The investigation follows the arrest of self-proclaimed PFIPC Director-General, Adeyemi Adeniyi, who is accused of orchestrating the inclusion of the agency in the 2026 budget despite its non-existence .

The controversy has drawn significant public attention after it emerged that the PFIPC was never legally established by the Nigerian government and had no basis under any law, presidential instrument, executive approval, or other lawful government authorization . President Bola Tinubu had earlier directed the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) to conduct a thorough investigation into the activities of the PFIPC, ordering the anti-corruption agency to submit a comprehensive report within 30 days . The ICPC has been directed to investigate allegedly forged appointment letters, the use of false claims of presidential appointment to obtain official recognition, and the opening of multiple bank accounts in the names of purported government agencies using allegedly forged documents .

The ad hoc committee, chaired by Yusuf Gagdi, has been tasked with investigating how the PFIPC found its way into the national budget with a whopping N1,302,978,784 allocation, comprising N802,978,783 for personnel costs, N200,000,001 for overheads, and N300,000,000 for capital expenditure . According to the presidency, the PFIPC was never established by the federal government, yet it reportedly secured office space within the Federal Secretariat in Abuja and operated bank accounts with the Central Bank of Nigeria . The panel will trace the budgetary provision from the executive’s proposal through the legislative process to identify the exact stage at which the allocation was introduced and determine whether any government processes were compromised .

READ ALSO:

• Foreign Interests, Sahel Terrorists Fueling Nigeria’s Insecurity Crisis – Presidency
• Messi’s final World Cup ends in heartbreak as Spain sweep title, FIFA’s top individual awards
• Spain dethrone Argentina in extra time to lift 2026 FIFA World Cup trophy

A notice signed by Gagdi has invited several top government officials to appear before the committee, including the Ministers of Budget and Economic Planning, Finance, Industry, Trade and Investment, Justice, and Foreign Affairs . Others summoned include the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, the Chairmen of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the ICPC, the Auditor-General for the Federation, the Fiscal Responsibility Commission, the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, the Director-General of the Department of State Services, and the Inspector-General of Police . Civil society organisations, professional bodies, development partners, and members of the public have also been invited to submit memoranda relating to the committee’s terms of reference .

However, the committee’s decision not to invite either Gbajabiamila or Adeniyi has drawn sharp criticism, with some lawmakers questioning the transparency of the investigation. A member of the committee, speaking on condition of anonymity, expressed disappointment over the omission, arguing that the two central figures in the controversy should have been among the first witnesses called. “From the notice, you will see that the two central figures are not invited. I mean Gbajabiamila and Adeyemi. There is an obvious attempt to exempt Gbajabiamila, and that is an attempt by the committee to clear him. From the notice of invitation, there is already a bias,” the lawmaker said .

Public affairs analyst Jackson Ojo also faulted the decision, arguing that inviting the Chief of Staff was necessary to ensure a transparent investigation. “The committee is starting on the wrong footing. They should have invited the Chief of Staff to clear his name. As important as the invited government officials are to the investigation, they are not as important as Gbajabiamila. The man taken into custody mentioned the Chief of Staff. So, why is he not part of those to field questions from the lawmakers?” he asked .

The controversy erupted after Adeniyi Adeyemi, who presented himself as the PFIPC Director-General, was arrested by police operatives in Osun State following a bench warrant issued by the Federal High Court in Abuja . Adeniyi had failed to appear for his arraignment on an eight-count charge bordering on conspiracy, forgery, and impersonation . Police forensic analysis confirmed that the signature of the President’s Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila, on the disputed appointment letter had been forged . Adeniyi is accused of forging presidential letterheads and fabricating requests for office accommodation purportedly originating from the State House .

The scandal deepened after Adeniyi allegedly claimed he paid ₦100 million through proxies to Gbajabiamila to facilitate the establishment of the agency . Gbajabiamila has denied the allegations and filed a N15 billion defamation suit against Adeniyi, seeking N10 billion in general damages, N5 billion in aggravated damages, and an order compelling him to publish a retraction and apology in five national newspapers . Both the Presidency and the Office of the Chief of Staff have denied the allegation, with Gbajabiamila stating he had never met Adeniyi .

The Nigerian Guild of Investigative Journalists (NGIJ) has called for an independent panel of inquiry, arguing that the scale of the allegations suggests official backing beyond the actions of a few individuals. The Guild noted that an account was reportedly opened for the council at the Central Bank of Nigeria, the agency was captured in the 2026 Appropriation Bill, office accommodation was allocated within the Federal Secretariat Complex, and more than 300 personnel, including eight directors, were reportedly recruited to work for the council . These developments, if established through investigation, suggest that the activities attributed to the council went far beyond the actions of a few individuals and may have involved approvals or support from influential actors within government . The Guild maintained that no public official, irrespective of rank or political influence, should be insulated from investigation where credible allegations exist .

Deputy Speaker Benjamin Kalu revealed during plenary that he had personally met representatives of the disputed organisation after his office received what appeared to be an official government letter. According to Kalu, the correspondence identified the organisation as both the Presidential Economic Advisory Council and the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PEAC/PFIPC) and carried the Presidency’s insignia, a Federal Secretariat address, and a “.gov.ng“ website . He said the delegation appeared more interested in taking photographs than discussing policy matters during the meeting . Meanwhile, the Senate has resolved to await the outcome of the ICPC investigation before proceeding with its own legislative probe .

Reps Probe ₦1.32 Billion ‘Fake Agency’ Scandal as Critics Slam Gbajabiamila’s Exclusion from Inquiry