The House of Representatives on Wednesday resolved to invite the Minister of Budget and Economic Planning and the Director-General of the Budget Office of the Federation to explain how the N1.3 billion allocation of the ‘fictitious’ Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC) found its way into the 2026 budget.
The resolution followed the adoption of a motion of urgent public importance moved by Hon. Yusuf Gagdi (APC, Plateau), who described the scandal as a serious threat to the credibility of Nigeria’s appropriation process and public financial management.
This is coming after President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s directive to the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) to investigate the activities of the controversial council and submit a report within 30 days.
The Senate had distanced itself from the PFIPC, its purported Director-General, Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi, and the council’s N1.3 billion allocation in the budget, maintaining that the scandal is an executive matter it would not dabble into, except it receives a petition to that effect. It further declined on Wednesday to investigate the matter.
The Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, had issued a disclaimer, dismissing the existence of the PFIPC, but Adeyemi countered, describing it as “a cloud of public misrepresentation, institutional denial and a deliberate attempt to silence legitimate questions that concern matters of national interest.”
Consequently, the Presidency, in a July 1 statement by the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, tagged Adeyemi a “con artist” and stated that the police had filed a criminal charge against him.
The statement was, however, silent on the inclusion of the disputed council in the budget and an alleged sum of N400 million Adeyemi claimed to have paid Gbajabiamila by proxy to facilitate his appointment. A further scrutiny of the statement raised more critical questions bordering on public accountability, transparency and institutional integrity.
Findings further revealed that Adeyemi got approvals for the employment of 300 staff members and an office space at the Federal Secretariat, Abuja, and opened accounts with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).
But the Office of the Accountant General of the Federation (OAGF) insisted that the disputed council had no account with the apex bank, contradicting the Presidency’s statement that Adeyemi used fake documents and misled the OAGF to fraudulently open a CBN account.
After Adeyemi went into hiding, police raided his family residence in Ogbomoso, Oyo State, on Monday and arrested his father, who was later released after questioning.
Moving the motion for the probe of the controversial council at the plenary on Wednesday, Gagdi recalled that it operated from the Federal Secretariat Complex in Abuja and engaged with several government institutions.
He told lawmakers that the organisation is already the subject of criminal proceedings before the Federal High Court in Abuja, stressing that the House inquiry would be limited to the budgetary implications and institutional failures that enabled the phony council to gain official recognition.
According to him, the organisation relied on a document claiming it was established under “Chapter N2117 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria.”
He, however, said records of the National Assembly showed that no legislation establishing such a council had been enacted, adding that the closest existing law was the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission (NIPC) Act.
Gagdi expressed concerns that more than N1.3 billion was reflected in the 2026 budget for the council, saying the development raised fundamental questions about the integrity of the budget preparation and approval process.
“The ease with which a single unestablished entity was processed through official channels suggests a systemic vulnerability rather than an isolated administrative lapse,” he said.
Following the adoption of the motion, the House resolved to constitute an ad hoc committee to trace how the budgetary provision found its way into the budget, from the executive proposal through legislative consideration.
Lawmakers also directed that all ministries, departments, agencies and government bodies contained in the 2025 and 2026 Appropriation Frameworks be verified against their respective legal instruments of establishment.
The House further requested the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation to confirm that no public funds had been released and that no payment warrants would be issued in favour of the PFIPC pending the conclusion of the investigation.
It also mandated the Budget Office of the Federation to, henceforth, submit alongside every appropriation bill a comprehensive and certified list of all agencies proposed for funding, indicating the enabling law establishing each of them to prevent the inclusion of fictitious entities.
In his contribution, Deputy Speaker Benjamin Kalu, disclosed that he had personally received representatives of the organisation after his office was sent a letterhead bearing the Presidency’s insignia.
According to him, the correspondence, dated May 2, 2025, came from a body identifying itself as both the Presidential Economic Advisory Council (PEAC) and the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council.
Kalu said the letter carried a federal secretariat address, an official-looking government logo and a “.gov.ng” website, prompting his office to verify the organisation’s location before granting the delegation an audience.
He said although officials confirmed that the organisation operated from the stated office, the visitors abandoned the policy issues contained in their letter during the meeting and appeared more interested in taking photographs.
“This shows that having the Presidency on a letterhead is no longer sufficient proof that an agency is genuine,” the Deputy Speaker said, adding that the House must establish how the organisation secured office accommodation within the federal secretariat and gained access to senior government officials.
