•House of Representatives
The House of Representatives Ad Hoc Committee investigating the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC) failed to sit today as scheduled, raising fresh questions over the next phase of the probe.
The committee had adjourned its previous investigative hearing to August 12 for the continuation of proceedings, with relevant government agencies and stakeholders expected to appear, reports Vanguard.
However, the scheduled sitting did not hold, leaving journalists and other stakeholders without an official explanation.
As of the time of filing this report, neither the committee nor its Chairman, Rep. Yusuf Gagdi, had issued a statement on why the hearing was not held or whether a new date had been fixed.
The development came as the investigation approaches what the committee had earlier indicated could be the concluding stage of its public hearings, before members compile their findings and recommendations.
How the controversy started
The controversy centres on the PFIPC, an organisation that allegedly operated as a federal government agency despite claims that it was not established by law, executive order or any other valid government instrument.
Questions arose after the purported council was included in the 2026 Appropriation Act, with about N1.3 billion allocated to it.
The House subsequently constituted a 12-member ad hoc committee, chaired by Gagdi, to investigate how the organisation found its way into the Federal Government’s budget and operated within government structures.
The probe has expanded to allegations involving forged official documents, acquisition of office space, use of government vehicle number plates and attempts to obtain recognition from various Ministries, Departments and Agencies.
Alleged forged documents
A major development before the committee was the discovery of documents allegedly linked to several government institutions.
The Accountant-General of the Federation, Shamseldeen Ogunjimi, told the committee that his office acted on a letter purportedly emanating from the State House in processing a budget code for the council.
He later stated that the letter did not originate from the presidency.
“The letter that was received by the Treasury was respectfully addressed as coming from the State House. That letter was never issued by the State House,” Ogunjimi said.
The committee subsequently said it had uncovered about 29 allegedly forged official documents connected to the purported agency.
The documents were reportedly traced to institutions including the State House, the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation and the Federal Ministry of Finance.
The Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Didi Esther Walson-Jack, also told the panel that due diligence was not sufficiently conducted in the handling of documents relating to the purported agency.
Gagdi subsequently described the purported appointment letter of the alleged Director-General of the PFIPC, Adeniyi Adeyemi, as fake.
Adeyemi’s appearance remains unresolved
Another major issue in the investigation is the committee’s inability to publicly question Adeyemi, who presented himself as the Director-General of the purported council.
The committee had earlier directed the Inspector-General of Police to produce Adeyemi within 48 hours, saying his testimony was necessary to resolve outstanding questions surrounding the organisation and the documents attributed to it.
The police, however, informed the committee that Adeyemi was being held pursuant to a court order and could not be released to appear before the lawmakers without appropriate judicial authorisation.
The committee subsequently resolved to question him at an undisclosed time and location to avoid interfering with ongoing criminal investigations by security and anti-corruption agencies.
Adeyemi’s legal team, however, has argued that he should be allowed to respond to the allegations publicly, noting that other persons involved in the matter had appeared before the committee.
Presidency disowns council
The State House has also denied authorising the creation of the PFIPC or requesting a budget code for it.
Appearing before the committee, the Director of Administration in the State House, Abdulkadir Idris, said the presidency neither created the council nor wrote to the Accountant-General seeking a budget code for it.
“We did not send any correspondence or request to the Office of the Accountant-General in respect of this council. We don’t even know anything about this council. We only heard about it when it started appearing in the news,” he said.
The State House also disowned a purported document allegedly signed by one “Akande Adewale” as Director of Administration and Support Services, saying there was no such official or department in the presidency.
ICPC submits interim findings
The development came shortly after the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) submitted its interim findings on the matter.
The Commission said its investigation established that Adeyemi was not appointed by the federal government or any authorised government institution and that the PFIPC was not established by law, executive order or any valid government instrument.
It also said the appointment letter and other documents allegedly used by Adeyemi were forged, adding that the purported council had appropriated the identity, office and operational structures of the former Presidential Economic Advisory Council.
However, the ICPC said it found no evidence that federal government funds were actually released or disbursed to the purported agency.
It identified weaknesses in verification processes within some government institutions and recommended the prosecution of Adeyemi, administrative sanctions against officials whose negligence facilitated the alleged scheme, as well as institutional reforms to strengthen verification and internal controls.
Fresh questions over probe
The committee’s failure to sit on its announced date is likely to generate further questions, particularly as several issues remain unresolved and the investigation appears to be nearing its conclusion.
The probe is expected to establish not only how the purported council emerged but also how it allegedly gained access to government facilities, appeared in the national budget and interacted with public institutions without being detected earlier.
The central issue, therefore, extends beyond the allegations against Adeyemi to the institutional processes that allegedly allowed the organisation to operate.
With today’s sitting aborted, attention will now turn to when the committee will reconvene and how its eventual findings will relate to the interim conclusions already reached by the ICPC.
