FRESH disagreements have emerged within the House of Representatives ad hoc committee investigating the operations and circumstances surrounding the purported Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC), delaying the drafting of the panel’s final report.
News Point Nigeria reports that the committee, chaired by Plateau State lawmaker, Yusuf Gagdi, has been sitting for more than a month and is currently putting the finishing touches to its report ahead of its presentation to the House when plenary resumes.
he committee questioned several senior government officials, including the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Didi Walson-Jack; Director of Banking Services at the Central Bank of Nigeria, Hamisu Abdullahi; Director-General of the Budget Office of the Federation, Tanimu Yakubu; and the Head of the Federal Projects Financial Management Department in the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation, Joshua Luka, among others.
The officials were questioned over their respective roles in the processes through which the purported agency appeared to gain recognition within government.
The affected agencies told the committee that they acted on information and documents presented to them by Adeniyi Adeyemi, who had presented himself as the Director-General of the organisation.
Adeyemi had earlier alleged that he paid N400 million to the Chief of Staff to President Bola Tinubu, Femi Gbajabiamila, through a proxy to facilitate his appointment as Director-General of the agency.
He subsequently clarified that he never met Gbajabiamila personally.
The Presidency and the Chief of Staff denied the allegation, describing the purported agency as fictitious and accusing Adeyemi of forging official documents to aid his alleged unlawful conduct.
In a separate investigation, the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) cleared the Presidency of wrongdoing in the controversy and recommended Adeyemi’s prosecution.
Although Gagdi had, about two weeks ago, indicated that the committee would address a press conference after questioning the government institutions involved in the matter, no such briefing has been held.
The committee had also indicated that it would question Adeyemi at an undisclosed location.
However, the plan reportedly ran into difficulty after Adeyemi insisted that he should testify publicly, in the presence of journalists and his legal team.
Sunday PUNCH gathered that another issue dividing members of the 12-man committee is the absence of a formal invitation to Gbajabiamila to appear before the panel and respond to the allegation in which his name featured prominently.
A source familiar with the proceedings, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to discuss the matter, said the disagreement was contributing to the delay in concluding the report.
“Some of the committee members feel there should have been a presentation from Gbajabiamila since Adeyemi is alleged to have mentioned his name in the saga. So, writing a report without listening to him may attract criticism from the public.
“Secondly, some believe that the committee should write the court to release Adeyemi to testify before it in public. These are the issues delaying the report,” the source said.
Amnesty International, in its contribution to the controversy, described the development as a reflection of the weaknesses in Nigeria’s governance institutions and called for an independent panel of inquiry to establish what transpired.
Speaking exclusively with a correspondent, the Country Director of Amnesty International Nigeria, Isa Sanusi, said the PFIPC controversy showed how deeply institutional weaknesses had affected governance in the country.
He said, “The incident of the fake government agency is an indictment of the Nigerian government. It is a practical indication of the rampant corruption within and around government agencies. The fact that such a scam can happen is an indication of how weak government institutions are.
“The whole investigation is a circus. It is a sham that is staged to pretend to be about accountability.”
Sanusi questioned the ability of the House committee to deliver an impartial outcome, arguing that government officials should not be left to investigate matters involving their own institutions and colleagues.
“Only an independent investigation can deliver results. Government officials and friends investigating their friends in power is theatre of the absurd,” he added.
Similarly, Transparency International Nigeria warned that the Gagdi-led committee could conclude its investigation without answering some of the fundamental questions raised by the PFIPC controversy.
In an exclusive interview with a correspondent, the Executive Director of Transparency International Nigeria, Auwal Rafsanjani, said the organisation was concerned that the parliamentary investigation “risks ending without satisfactorily answering the most fundamental questions raised by the scandal.”
According to him, the controversy goes beyond allegations of impersonation and forgery against Adeyemi.
“It is not an ordinary allegation of impersonation by one individual,” he said.
“The central question Nigerians are asking is how an entity which the Presidency says had no lawful existence was able to penetrate several layers of the Federal Government, obtain official recognition, secure office accommodation within the Federal Secretariat and appear in the 2026 Appropriation Act with an allocation exceeding N1.3 billion.”
While commending the committee for investigating Adeyemi, Rafsanjani said all other persons whose names featured materially in the controversy should also be allowed to appear before the panel.