PFIPC: Detained ‘Fake’ Agency DG Breaks Silence, Names Top Government Agencies

The detained promoter of the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC), Adeniyi Adeyemi has defended himself against allegations that he independently created and operated a non-existent federal agency.

Adeyemi, who is currently in police custody, said several government institutions interacted with, processed documents for, and officially recognised the council over a period of time.

Politics Nigeria reports that he made the claims through a statement issued on Sunday by his legal team.

The statement was signed by his lawyer, Festus Akhigbe, who also called on the House of Representatives ad hoc committee investigating the matter to allow Adeyemi appear before lawmakers and present his side of the story.

According to the legal team, denying him the opportunity to testify would amount to a violation of his constitutional right to fair hearing.

“We formally request that the panel issue the necessary administrative clearance to allow our client, Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew, to appear in person and testify.

“Any investigative outcome or final legislative report produced without affording our client a direct hearing would be fundamentally flawed, incomplete, and a breach of the constitutional right to a fair hearing (audi alteram partem),” the statement said.

Adeyemi’s lawyers argued that recent attempts to portray him as the sole architect of the controversial agency do not reflect the full picture of events.

They maintained that multiple ministries, departments and agencies of the Federal Government engaged with the council at different stages of its operations.

According to the defence team, documents linked to the council were acknowledged by the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, while office accommodation was reportedly facilitated within the Federal Secretariat.

The lawyers further claimed that other government institutions also carried out administrative actions connected to the council.

“We, the legal defence team of Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi, issue this public statement to set the record straight following recent developments, our client’s current police detention, and the ongoing legislative hearings.

“The Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation and Central Bank of Nigeria acted on official documentation to issue administrative budget codes, grant self-accounting status, post federal civil service staff to the council, and officially open operational accounts.

“The Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation: Formally approved the establishment structure and granted recruitment waivers that enabled the onboarding of 314 personnel.”

The statement also alleged that top security officials attended events organised by the council during its period of operation.

Adeyemi’s legal team further claimed that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) allocated property to the council, requested a processing fee and later presented a plaque of recognition to its leadership.

The defence insisted that these interactions demonstrate that the council was not operating in isolation and that several government institutions had dealings with it.

The lawyers questioned how one individual could be solely blamed for the existence of an organisation that allegedly received recognition and administrative support from different arms of government.

“If the SGF, the Accountant-General, the Central Bank of Nigeria, the Head of Service, the Budget Office, the EFCC, the National Assembly, and the heads of Nigeria’s primary security architecture all verified, processed, funded, and officially interacted with this agency over an extended period, how can a single citizen, Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi, be held uniquely responsible for failing to detect what the entire apparatus of the State validated?

“It is an administrative impossibility for an unassisted individual to mislead every arm of the Federal Government simultaneously without official, high-level institutional sanction.”

The legal team said its client was being unfairly singled out while broader questions surrounding the council’s operations and official engagements remain unanswered.

According to the statement, attention should not only be focused on the individual at the centre of the controversy but also on the government structures that allegedly processed and approved activities linked to the organisation.

The lawyers described Adeyemi as a possible victim of systemic failures within public institutions.

They argued that the investigation should be expanded to include all agencies and officials who handled requests, approvals and administrative processes associated with the council.

The defence team also called for the involvement of independent observers, legal professionals and civil society groups in the ongoing probe.

“While we note the ongoing proceedings by the House of Representatives ad hoc committee and investigating bodies, justice cannot be served by prosecuting the mouthpiece while ignoring the state machinery that built, budgeted, and bureaucratically birthed the entity.

“We reiterate our call for a truly comprehensive, multi-stakeholder panel that includes civil society, legal experts, and independent observers to audit the complete paper trail across all involved ministries, departments, and agencies.”

The House of Representatives committee investigating the matter has already heard from several senior government officials.

Among those who appeared before the panel was the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Didi Walson-Jack.

During her appearance, she acknowledged that her office did not conduct sufficient verification before approving recruitment-related requests associated with the council.

Nevertheless, the committee is expected to continue its investigation as lawmakers seek to determine how the agency operated.

More details as event unfolds…