A House of Representatives investigative panel has uncovered a series of documents it says were allegedly forged, altered or fabricated to create the appearance that the controversial Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) had been legally established by the Federal Government.
The House Ad Hoc Committee investigating the purported organisation said its preliminary findings indicated that the PFIPC was not lawfully created, despite documents allegedly presented as presidential instruments, National Assembly legislation and official correspondence being used to project the organisation as a legitimate government institution.
The committee, chaired by Rep. Yusuf Adamu Gagdi, also disclosed financial findings involving approximately 58 bank accounts allegedly connected to Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi, who was presented as the Director-General of the purported council. The lawmakers further revealed an alleged ₦400 million transaction involving Adeyemi that remains under investigation.
At the same time, the committee cleared the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, of allegations that he authorised, established or participated in the activities of the purported agency. According to the panel, evidence presented during the investigation instead showed that Gbajabiamila took steps to initiate investigations after concerns about the organisation were brought to his attention.
One of the documents examined by the committee was a purported appointment letter naming Adeyemi as Director-General of the PFIPC. The document allegedly carried the authority and signature of Gbajabiamila and was presented as evidence that the Presidency had formally recognised the organisation.
The committee, however, said verification carried out at the State House established that no such appointment had been made or approved by the Presidency. It said the Chief of Staff neither issued nor signed the document and that the letterhead used was not authentic State House stationery.
The lawmakers also found that the reference number appearing on the purported appointment letter did not conform to the official referencing system used by the Presidency. In addition, the format, wording and administrative characteristics of the document were said to differ materially from genuine State House correspondence.
On the basis of the evidence available to it, the committee therefore made a preliminary finding that the appointment letter had been fabricated and falsely attributed to the Presidency.
Rather than finding evidence implicating Gbajabiamila in the alleged operation, the panel said documents before it showed that he responded to concerns surrounding the purported organisation by seeking intervention from security and government agencies.
The committee said an alert from the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission over suspected fraudulent activities and alleged misuse of institutional materials prompted action from the Chief of Staff. According to the panel, Gbajabiamila communicated with the Nigeria Police Force, the Office of the National Security Adviser, the Department of State Services and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission within one day of receiving the alert.
The committee further said the Chief of Staff initiated administrative verification through relevant government institutions. When additional concerns later emerged concerning a proposed World Investment Summit, he reportedly sent further communications requesting investigation and appropriate action.
Based on those records, the committee said there was no documentary evidence before it establishing that Gbajabiamila authorised, approved, established or participated in the activities of the purported PFIPC.
Instead, the panel said the available evidence pointed to repeated attempts by the Chief of Staff to obtain institutional verification, trigger security investigations and secure appropriate administrative intervention whenever the matter was formally brought to his attention.
The committee consequently commended Gbajabiamila for what it described as timely security and administrative measures taken in response to the concerns.
Alleged fake presidential Executive Order
The investigation also uncovered what the committee described as a purported Presidential Executive Order No. 5 dated February 24, 2026.
The document was allegedly presented as the legal instrument that gave the PFIPC presidential authority. The committee, however, said the evidence before it indicated that the document was not an authentic Executive Order issued by the President.
According to the panel, the document did not pass through the lawful processes required for the issuance or approval of a presidential Executive Order. It therefore made a preliminary finding that the purported instrument was neither issued nor approved through the lawful procedures of the Presidency.
The lawmakers described the alleged fabrication of a presidential instrument as particularly serious because of the potential implications for the authority and integrity of the Nigerian state.
Purported National Assembly law also questioned
The committee said its investigation uncovered another document presented as an Act of the National Assembly establishing the purported organisation.
According to the panel, the document had not been passed by both chambers of the National Assembly, assented to by the President or gazetted as an Act of the Federation.
The lawmakers further found that sections of a document relating to another institution appeared to have been electronically altered, mutilated or substituted in a manner that allegedly created the impression that Parliament had enacted legislation establishing the PFIPC.
The committee described the finding as particularly grave, stressing that legislative authority could not lawfully be created by altering or fabricating existing documents.
It warned that no individual, organisation or private group had the authority to manufacture parliamentary legitimacy by editing, mutilating, substituting or fabricating documents and presenting them as laws enacted by the National Assembly.
Alleged State House letter used to obtain government code
Another document under scrutiny was a letter dated November 7, 2024, purportedly issued by the State House to the Accountant-General of the Federation.
The letter reportedly requested the creation of an administrative code for the PFIPC and was allegedly signed by a person identified as Akambi Adewale, described in the document as a Director of Administration and Support Services.
The committee said verification by the State House raised serious questions about the authenticity of the correspondence. It found that the office represented in the document did not exist in the stated form and that the directorate cited in the letter was not structured as represented.
The panel also said there was no State House officer known as Akambi Adewale serving in the capacity indicated on the document.
It therefore made a preliminary finding that fictitious names, offices and official designations had allegedly been used in correspondence directed at an important financial institution of the Federal Government.
Accountant-General’s Office and Budget Office examined
The Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation has also come under scrutiny as part of the investigation.
According to the committee, the Accountant-General’s Office confirmed that its response to the purported State House request was genuine, even though the original request itself was allegedly forged.
The office reportedly acknowledged that its response should not have been released directly to Adeyemi or another unauthorised individual. Instead, the correspondence should have been transmitted through an authenticated official channel.
The committee said it was investigating how the response was released and whether the incident resulted from negligence, failure to comply with verification procedures, breach of established correspondence rules, deliberate disregard for due process or intentional facilitation.
The Budget Office of the Federation is similarly being examined over how the purported organisation allegedly obtained recognition within the Federal Budget Framework despite the committee’s finding that it lacked lawful status.
Purported agency occupied Federal Secretariat office
The investigation also extended to the physical presence of the PFIPC within the Federal Secretariat Complex.
The committee said the organisation occupied office accommodation without lawful allocation from the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation.
Evidence before the lawmakers allegedly showed that part of an accommodation previously allocated to the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation was subsequently made available to the purported organisation by certain officers without lawful authority.
The committee said occupying space within the Federal Secretariat was significant because the arrangement could have helped the organisation create the appearance of being an officially recognised Federal Government institution.
39 people allegedly presented as employees
The lawmakers also disclosed that approximately 39 individuals were allegedly presented as employees of the purported organisation.
Their recruitment and appointments are now part of the investigation, with the committee examining appointment letters, identification cards, salaries and allowances associated with the individuals.
The panel is also investigating allegations that some people may have been required to make payments as a condition for securing employment with the organisation.
However, the committee said it would distinguish between individuals who may have been deceived into believing that they were joining a legitimate government institution and those who knowingly participated in or benefited from the activities under investigation.
Investigation uncovers about 58 bank accounts
A major component of the committee’s preliminary financial findings concerns a network of bank accounts allegedly linked to Adeyemi.
The panel said preliminary financial information indicated that identifying details associated with Adeyemi, who also appeared in some records as Adeyemi Matthew, were connected to approximately 58 bank accounts.
More than 30 of the accounts were apparently operated under the names of different agencies, companies, foundations or other related entities, according to the committee.
The lawmakers stressed that the discovery of the accounts did not, by itself, establish that every account or entity was involved in unlawful activity.
They said investigators were still reconciling corporate registration records, account mandates, beneficial ownership information and transaction histories before reaching conclusions about the nature and purpose of the accounts.
Alleged ₦400m payment being traced
The committee also disclosed an allegation involving approximately ₦400 million allegedly paid by a company to Adeyemi in four separate instalments.
The company reportedly told the committee that it had been induced to make the payments after being promised a contract relating to the renovation, furnishing or improvement of a residence allegedly allocated to Adeyemi in his claimed official capacity.
The panel said investigators were tracing the payments to establish their destinations, identify the relevant account holders and determine the beneficial owners connected with the transactions.
The ownership and official status of the property allegedly presented as Adeyemi’s official residence are also being investigated.
The committee made clear that the financial findings remain subject to investigation and that the disclosure of the alleged transaction does not amount to a determination of criminal guilt. It stressed that all persons affected by the investigation remain entitled to fair hearing and due process.
Committee warns against impersonating federal institutions
Beyond the specific allegations involving the PFIPC, the lawmakers warned that the apparent use of forged presidential and legislative documents raised broader concerns about the integrity of Nigeria’s constitutional institutions.
The committee said the National Assembly could not allow its legislative authority to be counterfeited, just as the Presidency could not be impersonated without consequences.
It warned against the appropriation of the identity, authority and official instruments of the Federal Republic of Nigeria by private individuals or organisations seeking personal or commercial advantage.
The panel’s preliminary findings identified Adeyemi as the principal person associated with the representation and operation of the purported organisation, as well as with a wider network of related entities.
However, the committee repeatedly emphasised that its findings were preliminary and should not be interpreted as a final judicial determination of criminal responsibility.
Further investigation and possible prosecution
The committee has recommended that relevant security and anti-corruption agencies complete their investigations and prosecute any individual against whom sufficient admissible evidence is established.
It also called for the tracing, preservation, freezing and recovery of proceeds connected to any unlawful activity ultimately established, subject to applicable laws and judicial processes.
Outstanding aspects of the investigation are expected to be completed before the committee submits its final report to the House of Representatives.
That final report is expected to address individual and institutional responsibilities and could recommend legislative, administrative, disciplinary, civil, financial or criminal measures, depending on the evidence ultimately established.
For now, the committee’s position on the allegation involving Gbajabiamila is distinct from its findings concerning the purported PFIPC. It said no evidence presently before it established that the Chief of Staff authorised, approved, established or participated in the organisation’s activities.
Instead, the preliminary record presented by the committee indicates that Gbajabiamila took steps to initiate investigations and institutional checks after concerns about the organisation were brought to his attention.
The wider investigation remains ongoing, with the authenticity of official documents, the organisation’s occupation of government premises, its alleged recruitment of personnel, its financial network and the alleged ₦400 million transaction all subject to further scrutiny before the House considers the committee’s final recommendations.
Reps Panel Uncovers Alleged Forged Presidency, National Assembly Documents in PFIPC Probe
