ICPC grills Gbajabiamila over alleged role in PFIPC scandal

 

As Reps Speaker inaugurates panel to investigate PFIPC’s legal status

Office space used by PFIPC at federal secretariat was allocated to SGF office, says HoS

 

The Independent Corrupt Practices and other Offences Related Commission (ICPC) has quizzed Femi Gbajabiamila, Chief of Staff to the President, over the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC).

The ICPC Spokesperson, John Odey, confirmed the development in a chat with the News Agency of Nigeria on Monday in Abuja.

Odey explained that Gbajabiamila was invited by the commission over his alleged involvement in the establishement of the controversial agency.

He said that the chief of staff to the president, honoured the invitation and was questioned by the commission’s team of investigators.

“He was indeed at our office this afternoon. He was invited and he came, he volunteered a statement and left.

“We did not detain him; he was not arrested. He came on his own willingly,  gave his statement and left. He was cooperating with the investigations,” he said.

NAN reports that PFIPC became controversial after self-styled Director-General Adeniyi Adeyemi alleged that Gbajabiamila demanded 48 per cent of the agency’s ₦27.3 billion proposed take-of grant

Adeyemi also alleged that Gbajabiamila collected the sum of ₦400 million via a proxy from him to secure his appointment as the director general of the PFIPC and was requesting ₦200 million more for presidential approvals.

Gbajabiamila however in a sworn statement denied knowing Adeyemi and refuted claims of bribery, abuse of office, or interference with security agencies.

The Chief of Staff further denied allegations linking him to an alleged assassination attempt on Adeyemi

He further denied involvement in the alleged death of Babatunde Tanimola, whom Adeyemi claimed acted as an intermediary.

President Bola Tinubu had in view of the controversy directed the ICPC to probe the matter within 30 days.

Earlier in a statement on Monday, Gbajabiamila’s lawyer, Jiti Ogunye, confirmed the Chief of Staff’s appearance at the ICPC.

Ogunye said that Gbajabiamila appeared before the anti-corruption agency in compliance with President Bola Tinubu’s directive.

“In full cooperation with the ICPC acting as directed by the President of Nigeria, I hereby confirm that my client, Femi Gbajabiamila, Chief of Staff to the President of Nigeria, responded to the invitation by the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC)

“He appeared at about 15:00hrs on Monday, as part of the ongoing investigation into the activities of the ‘PFIPC’ fake agency, among others.

“My client gave his testimony, responded to questions accordingly, and has returned to his duty post,” he said.

Meanwhile, Speaker of House of Representatives, Rep. Abbas Tajudeen, has inaugurated an ad hoc committee to probe the alleged establishment of Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC) without a valid legal basis.

Speaking at the inauguration in Abuja on Monday, Tajudeen said that the subject before the committee had generated considerable public interest.

According to him, for weeks now, discussions surrounding PFIPC have dominated media reports, public commentary and policy debates.

He said that questions had been raised about its legal status, institutional mandate, operational framework, relationship with existing agencies and importantly, its appearance within the Federal Budget Framework despite widespread uncertainty regarding its establishment.

“These questions deserve clear, factual and authoritative answers.The House of Representatives has therefore not constituted this committee to validate speculation or amplify controversy, neither is this a political exercise. Our objective is simply to establish the facts.

“Democracy functions best when facts prevail over rumours, evidence over conjecture and accountability over opacity.

“Where legitimate public questions exist, parliament has both the authority and the obligation to seek answers in an open, fair and transparent manner,” he said.

Tajudeen, therefore, stated that the committee’s assignment should be guided by clear terms of reference.

“First, it should determine the legal basis, if any, for the establishment and operation of the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council.

“Second, it should investigate the circumstances surrounding the creation of the council, including the processes through which it came into existence and whether those processes complied with the constitution and extant laws.

“Third, it should examine the mandate, powers, governance structure, sources of funding, operational activities and institutional relationships of the council with existing statutory agencies responsible for investment promotion, economic planning and public finance

“Fourth, it should investigate the circumstances under which the council found its way into the Federal Budget Framework, identify the relevant approvals, authorisations and budgetary processes involved and determine whether due process was followed.

“Fifth, it should assess whether there has been any duplication of statutory functions with already established government institutions and evaluate the implications for public administration, fiscal responsibility and institutional efficiency.

“Sixth, it should receive memoranda and testimonies from all relevant ministries, departments and agencies, constitutional bodies, experts, civil society organisations and members of the public whose evidence may assist the committee in arriving at informed conclusions,” he stated.

Part of the committee’s terms of reference, the speaker said, was also to make recommendations to the House on any legislative, administrative or institutional reforms necessary to strengthen transparency, eliminate ambiguity, prevent duplication of functions, safeguard public resources and reinforce accountability in the establishment and funding of public institutions.

According to him, the inquiry is not about personalities but about institutions and the integrity of public administration.

“It is sacrosanct that every public institution derives its authority from law and exercises its responsibilities within the limits prescribed by law,” he said.

Tajudeen urged all public officials and witnesses to approach the investigation in good faith, saying that the committee could only succeed if every participant placed honesty above expediency, evidence above emotion and national interest above partisan considerations.

“This House expects the truth, not rehearsed scripts or defensive posturing.

“Nigerians deserve candour. They deserve explanations that withstand scrutiny. They deserve to know, with absolute certainty, that their public institutions operate within the law.

“I therefore encourage everyone appearing before this committee to cooperate fully, provide complete and truthful information and assist the committee in discharging its constitutional mandate,” he said.

In his remarks, Chairman of the committee, Rep. Yusuf Gagdi (APC-Plateau), said that the committee was a reflection of the House’s resolve to ensure that public institutions operate within the bounds of the law and remain accountable to the Nigerian people.

Gagdi said that the responsibility before the committee was significant and sensitive.

In a related development, Head of the Civil Service of the Federation (HoS), Esther Walson-Jack, says the office space used by the purported Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) at the federal secretariat in Abuja was allocated to the office of the secretary to the government of the federation (OSGF).

Walson-Jack spoke on Monday when she appeared before the house of representatives ad hoc committee investigating the PFIPC controversy and the N1.3 billion allocated to the council in the 2026 Appropriation Act.

She told lawmakers that although the council operated from an office in the federal secretariat phase III, the space was officially allocated to the OSGF.

 “We can state categorically that the office of the head of the civil service of the federation did not allocate any office space to the PFIPC,” she said.

Walson-Jack said the PFIPC approached the office of the head of service on August 6, 2025, seeking approval of its organisational structure, but the request was initially declined because the council did not submit the required documents.

She explained that newly established organisations are expected to provide either an establishment Act, an enabling legal instrument or other valid documents establishing their existence before such requests are processed.

Walson-Jack told lawmakers that during the 2025 annual workforce projection and human resources exercise, officials of the PFIPC said the council was participating for the first time and was operating with personnel seconded from other government agencies.

She said the council also sought an authorised establishment and a recruitment waiver to employ substantive staff, informing the office of the HoS that 14 officials, including its director-general, were already in place.

The HoS said the council submitted copies of its director-general’s appointment letter and documents showing that it already had a budget code.

She said the request was included alongside those of other ministries, departments and agencies in the fourth batch of submissions approved on July 18, 2025, by the permanent secretary overseeing the office during her absence.

Walson-Jack also dismissed claims that the office of the head of service posted civil servants to the council.

She said her office received a request seeking deployment of officers to support the PFIPC but said the request was never approved.

Walson-Jack noted that recruitment and placement of staff are the responsibility of individual government agencies and do not fall within the mandate of her office.

During the hearing, Hassan Fulata, a member of the committee, questioned why the HoS accepted the PFIPC’s documents without confirming the authenticity of its purported enabling Act.

Fulata said government agencies cannot participate in the budget process without valid legal backing, noting that officials ought to have verified the documents in line with the Acts Authentication Act before assigning a budget code.

Responding, Walson-Jack admitted shortcomings in the verification process, saying officers who initially assessed the documents were not lawyers and therefore failed to detect that the purported enabling Act was fake.

Walson-Jack said she only discovered the irregularity after the controversy surrounding the council’s budgetary allocation prompted her to review the documents personally.

She said the discovery exposed weaknesses in the HoS office, adding that a review of its standard operating procedures is underway to strengthen the legal scrutiny of documents submitted by government agencies.

“We need to have another level of verification. We need to have a lawyer on the team that will receive legal documents so that the lawyer can assess every legal document,” she said.

She added that multiple verification layers would now be introduced before legal documents are accepted.

“So we concede that we didn’t do the best we ought to have done in cross-checking those documents at the time they were presented,” she said.

Walson-Jack added that issues relating to the establishment, supervision and operations of the PFIPC fall outside the statutory mandate of the HoS and rest with the OSGF and other relevant government institutions.

On his part, Abdullahi Hamisu, director of banking services at the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), said two foreign currency accounts were opened for the PFIPC on the directive of the office of the accountant-general of the federation (OAGF).

He said the CBN followed its standard account-opening procedures and did not require an enabling Act before processing the request.

Hamisu added that the accounts were never funded or operated.