NIGERIA has seen many scandals involving public officials, government contracts and missing funds. The latest controversy surrounding a supposed presidential agency, however, raises a different and more disturbing question.
How does an organisation that the government now says never legally existed manage to operate for so long within the government system?
The question is bigger than the man at the centre of the controversy.
The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, ICPC, recently recommended the prosecution of Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew after investigating the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council, PFIPC. The commission said Adeyemi was never appointed by the Federal Government and that documents presented to support the appointment were forged. It also said the council itself had no legal existence.
President Bola Tinubu had ordered the investigation after the Presidency disowned the organisation.
That should have been the end of the story if this were simply a case of one man forging documents and pretending to be a government official.
It is not.
The troubling part is how far the alleged deception travelled.
The organisation reportedly operated from the Federal Secretariat in Abuja. It appeared in the 2026 federal budget framework with an allocation of about N1.3 billion, although the Budget Office later explained that no money was released because the required financial clearance was not completed.
That alone should make Nigerians pause.
A government agency is not supposed to become real simply because somebody prints a letter, occupies an office and presents himself as a senior official.
There are supposed to be checks.
There are ministries, departments and agencies. There are permanent secretaries, directors, accountants, legal officers, budget officials and security agencies. There are procedures for establishing government institutions, approving budgets and releasing public funds.
How then did the alleged deception survive for so long?
The House of Representatives has also opened an investigation into the matter, looking at the council’s legal status, operations and appearance in the federal budget. The committee has reportedly uncovered about 29 documents suspected of being forged.
The details should concern every Nigerian.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs told the lawmakers that Adeyemi approached the ministry three times seeking collaboration and endorsement for a proposed World Investment Summit. The ministry said it rejected the requests after noticing discrepancies in the documents and later sought clarification from the Office of the National Security Adviser.
This means warning signs existed.
Some officials apparently noticed them.
The bigger question is what happened after those warning signs appeared.
The Nigerian public has become used to hearing that someone has been arrested after a scandal has already become public. What citizens need is a system that can stop questionable activity before it becomes a national embarrassment.
The controversy has also touched the office of the President’s Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila, who was questioned by the ICPC during the investigation. The ICPC said he was invited to help establish how the purported agency operated from within the Federal Secretariat. Gbajabiamila has denied allegations made against him by Adeyemi.
That distinction matters.
An investigation is not a conviction. An allegation is not proof. Anyone accused deserves a fair opportunity to respond.
The real issue should therefore not be reduced to personalities.
Nigeria needs to know how its government systems allowed a purported agency to operate, secure an office, seek official partnerships and appear in the budget process despite questions about its legal status.
This is where the scandal becomes more than another political story.
It becomes a story about institutional weakness.
A country cannot build strong institutions if official-looking documents are enough to open doors that should be protected by verification. Government offices should not become places where anyone with the right letterhead can gain credibility.
The government also cannot rely entirely on anti-corruption agencies to clean up problems after they happen.
Prevention is just as important as prosecution.
Every government institution should know exactly who has authority to speak on its behalf. Every appointment should be independently verifiable. Every agency appearing in the national budget should have a clear legal foundation and identifiable responsibility. Every government office occupied by an organisation should have records showing who approved it and why.
These may sound like ordinary administrative procedures.
They are actually part of national security.
A fake government agency is not merely embarrassing. It can create opportunities for fraud, misrepresentation, exploitation of citizens and damage to Nigeria’s reputation before investors and foreign governments.
Imagine being a foreign investor invited to Nigeria by someone claiming to represent the Presidency, only to discover later that the organisation does not legally exist.
What confidence does that create?
Nigeria is working hard to attract investment. The country cannot afford situations that make international partners wonder whether an official communication from government is genuine.
There is another lesson here for Nigerians.
We often blame one person whenever a scandal breaks. The public demands arrest, prosecution and punishment. Those things may be necessary where wrongdoing is established.
Institutional accountability must go further.
If an individual allegedly forged documents, that person should answer for it. If officials ignored warning signs, they should also be held accountable where negligence is established. If government procedures allowed the problem to continue, those procedures must be fixed.
The ICPC has already recommended administrative sanctions against public officers whose alleged omissions or negligence facilitated the operation of the fake agency, alongside prosecution of Adeyemi.
That may be one of the most important parts of the entire investigation.
Nigeria does not only need to know who allegedly created the problem.
Nigeria needs to know who failed to stop it.
A government is only as strong as the systems protecting its authority.
The Presidency should not have to discover from the public that someone has been presenting a fictitious organisation as a presidential institution. The National Assembly should not have to investigate why an organisation whose legal existence was disputed appeared in the budget. Government agencies should not have to discover after the fact that people presenting themselves as officials may not have had the authority they claimed.
The country deserves better.
The lesson from this scandal should not simply be that one alleged fake official has been exposed.
The lesson should be that Nigeria must make it impossible for the next person to do the same thing.
Because the most disturbing question is no longer who created the fake agency.
It is this: If one person could get this far, how many other things are we not seeing?
- West is a seasoned journalist and development practitioner with over a decade of experience in media, human rights advocacy, and NGO leadership. Her syndicated column, The Wednesday Lens, is published every Wednesday in News Point Nigeria newspaper. She can be reached at bomawest111@gmail.com.