“The evidence presently available indicates that the document was not an authentic Executive Order of the President and was neither issued nor approved through the lawful processes of the Presidency,”
The House of Representatives Ad Hoc Committee investigating the controversial Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council, PFIPC, has exonerated the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, from allegations that he authorised, established or participated in the activities of the purported government agency.
The committee, chaired by Rep. Yusuf Adamu Gagdi, said its preliminary findings showed that the organisation was not lawfully created by the Federal Government and that documents allegedly used to confer presidential and legislative legitimacy on it were forged, fabricated or altered.
Of particular significance, the committee found that a purported letter appointing Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi as Director-General of the PFIPC and allegedly bearing Gbajabiamila’s authority and signature was not issued by the Chief of Staff or the Presidency.
According to the committee, evidence obtained from the State House established that “no such appointment was made or approved by the Presidency” and that “the Chief of Staff neither issued nor signed the letter.”
The lawmakers further found that the letterhead was not authentic State House letterhead, while the purported reference number was inconsistent with the official referencing system of the Presidency.
“The format, language and administrative features of the document departed materially from official State House correspondence,” the committee stated.
It consequently made a preliminary finding that “the purported appointment letter was fabricated and falsely attributed to the Presidency.”
The finding effectively clears Gbajabiamila of the allegation, as the committee said it found no evidence linking him to the purported appointment or organisation
It said that following an alert from the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission, NIPC, over suspected fraudulent activities and misuse of institutional materials, Gbajabiamila acted within one day by communicating with security and investigative agencies.
The agencies included the Nigeria Police Force, Office of the National Security Adviser, Department of State Services, DSS, and Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC.
The committee said he also initiated administrative verification through relevant government institutions.
It added that when additional concerns emerged, including issues surrounding a proposed World Investment Summit, further communications requesting investigation and appropriate action were issued.
The committee said it uncovered a purported Presidential Executive Order No. 5, dated February 24, 2026, which was allegedly used to provide legal authority for the organisation.
The lawmakers, however, said evidence before them indicated that the document was neither issued nor approved through lawful presidential processes.
“The evidence presently available indicates that the document was not an authentic Executive Order of the President and was neither issued nor approved through the lawful processes of the Presidency,” the committee said.
It described the alleged fabrication of a presidential instrument as an exceptionally serious matter capable of undermining the authority of the Nigerian state.
The committee also uncovered what it described as the alleged mutilation and fabrication of a document presented as an Act of the National Assembly establishing the purported agency.
According to the lawmakers, the document was never passed by both chambers of the National Assembly, assented to by the President or gazetted as an Act of the Federation.
More seriously, the committee said portions of a document relating to another institution appeared to have been electronically altered, mutilated or substituted to create the impression that Parliament had established the purported organisation.
The investigation also uncovered a letter dated November 7, 2024, purportedly from the State House and addressed to the Accountant-General of the Federation, requesting an administrative code for the PFIPC.
The letter was allegedly signed by one Akambi Adewale, described as a Director of Administration and Support Services.
However, the committee said the State House established that the office represented in the document did not exist in the stated form, the purported directorate did not exist as represented and no State House officer known as Akambi Adewale served in the claimed capacity.
“The Committee therefore preliminarily finds that fictitious names, offices and official designations were deployed in a document calculated to mislead an important financial institution of the Federal Government,” the report stated.
While identifying alleged fraud and forgery, the committee also uncovered what it described as institutional lapses within government agencies.
The Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation reportedly confirmed that its response to the purported State House request was authentic, although the originating request itself was allegedly forged.
The office also acknowledged that its response ought not to have been released to Adeyemi or another unauthorised person but should have been transmitted through a properly authenticated official channel.
The committee said it was investigating whether the incident resulted from negligence, failure to observe verification requirements, breach of correspondence procedures, wilful disregard of due process or deliberate facilitation.
The committee said the matter went beyond the alleged creation of a fake agency, warning that the alleged fabrication of presidential and legislative documents represented a threat to the integrity of Nigeria’s constitutional institutions.
“The National Assembly cannot permit its legislative authority to be counterfeited,” the committee declared.
“The Presidency cannot be impersonated with impunity.”
It further stated: “The identity, authority and instruments of the Federal Republic of Nigeria cannot be appropriated by any private individual or organisation for personal advantage.”
The committee said its preliminary evidence identified Adeyemi as the principal person associated with the representation and operation of the purported organisation and with a wider network of related entities.