The controversy surrounding the alleged Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council has taken a fresh turn, with the council’s detained self-styled Director-General, Adeniyi Adeyemi, insisting that his lawyers and journalists must be present before he will submit to questioning by the House of Representatives investigative committee.
Adeyemi, who is currently in police custody, was expected to appear before the Yusuf Gagdi-led House Ad Hoc Committee investigating the activities of the controversial council after an earlier attempt by lawmakers to question him was unsuccessful.
According to The PUNCH, the committee had yet to determine the venue for the proposed interrogation.
Asked whether a venue had been fixed, the source simply said, “No decision yet.”
The uncertainty followed Adeyemi’s refusal to answer questions when members of the committee visited him in police custody last Thursday.
His family subsequently disclosed that he had told the lawmakers he would only participate in the proceedings if his legal representatives and members of the media were allowed to attend.
“They eventually rescheduled to Monday and my brother told them that when they are coming, they should come with the media, otherwise he will not grant them audience,” a family source said.
According to the source, the committee initially indicated that journalists could attend but later reversed the decision.
“They said if he refuses to grant them audience, they will go ahead and conclude their investigation and it will be said that he was the one who failed to grant them audience,” the source added.
Adeyemi’s lawyer, Ademola Oyedokun, had earlier objected to plans by the committee to question his client at an undisclosed location while he remained in police custody.
Oyedokun said Adeyemi was prepared to answer questions but argued that he should be given the same opportunity to defend himself publicly as those who had made allegations against him.
“We have read that the committee intends to interview our client at an undisclosed date and place. We ask it, respectfully, to think again,” the lawyer said.
He argued that since statements and allegations concerning his client had been made publicly, Adeyemi should also be allowed to respond in an open setting.
The committee had announced that it would question Adeyemi in police custody because of his continued detention under a court order.
Its chairman, Gagdi, explained that the lawmakers did not want to interfere with ongoing investigations by the Nigeria Police Force, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission.
He also stressed that the National Assembly could not disregard a subsisting court order or act in a manner that undermined the judiciary and the principle of separation of powers.
Reps probe N1.32bn PFIPC budget
The House committee is investigating how the PFIPC allegedly secured office accommodation within the Federal Secretariat Complex in Abuja and obtained more than N1.32bn in the 2026 Appropriation Act despite claims that the organisation had no legal foundation.
The inquiry has raised broader questions about how an organisation allegedly not established by law could gain access to government facilities, participate in official activities and secure a budgetary provision.
The committee has already questioned several senior government officials, including the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Didi Walson-Jack; the Director-General of the Budget Office of the Federation, Tanimu Yakubu; the Director of Banking Services at the Central Bank of Nigeria, Hamisu Abdullahi; and representatives of the Inspector-General of Police.
Their testimonies have reportedly raised questions about how Adeyemi allegedly presented himself as the head of the PFIPC and obtained recognition within government circles.
The controversy centres on allegations of impersonation, forgery, financial impropriety and the unauthorised use of government facilities and official insignia.
Investigators also reportedly established that a signature attributed to the President’s Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila, was forged.
CUPP rejects ICPC findings
Meanwhile, the Coalition of United Political Parties has rejected the findings of the ICPC investigation, which reportedly cleared the Presidency of wrongdoing while indicting Adeyemi.
CUPP spokesperson, Agu Bryan, described the outcome as inadequate and demanded a broader investigation into the roles allegedly played by government officials and institutions.
“The ICPC probe of the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council which exonerated the Presidency and indicted Adeniyi Adeyemi is nothing short of a charade,” Bryan said.
He questioned how Adeyemi could allegedly have operated an organisation of such magnitude without assistance from officials within government.
According to him, investigators should establish the roles of institutions mentioned in Adeyemi’s correspondence, including the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, the Central Bank of Nigeria and the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation.
Bryan particularly pointed to testimony by Walson-Jack that her office failed to conduct due diligence on some documents associated with the controversial council.
The coalition also questioned how an allegedly non-existent agency found its way into the national budget.
“The National Assembly, particularly the House of Representatives, which appropriated funds to an agency that, according to the investigation, never existed as a creation of law, also owes Nigerians an explanation,” Bryan said.
He asked which officials within the Ministry of Budget and National Planning processed the PFIPC budget line and what verification procedures were followed before the allocation was approved.
CUPP further questioned claims concerning the recruitment of hundreds of employees and the extent of Adeyemi’s access to official government activities.
Bryan argued that the investigation should go beyond establishing whether Adeyemi forged documents.
“The question is how did he gain access to government processes and institutions?” he asked.
He also questioned how many other official documents or signatures allegedly used by Adeyemi might have been forged following the discovery concerning the Chief of Staff’s signature.
The political coalition also urged the House committee to give Adeyemi an opportunity to defend himself, arguing that his direct testimony could help establish whether he acted alone or had accomplices within government.
Bryan asked whether Adeyemi had been given a fair hearing and whether he had been given the opportunity to appear before the Gagdi-led committee and respond directly to the allegations against him.
He invoked the legal principle nemo judex in causa sua—that no one should be a judge in his own cause—while calling for an investigation that would be transparent and independent.
Bryan further suggested that independent professional organisations, including the Nigerian Bar Association, the West African Bar Association or private investigators, could be brought into the process if the government was genuinely interested in establishing the facts.
The police, meanwhile, said Adeyemi could receive visitors, including lawmakers, provided they fulfilled the necessary requirements.
Police spokesperson Ani Ineidu said he was not aware whether the committee had obtained the required authorisation but noted that persons in custody had rights to visitors subject to the applicable conditions.
