• Foreign Affairs says it alerted ONSA over PFIPC documents
• Reps questions NSA’s response to PFIPC alert
• Bianca to appear as Reps warns defaulting MDAs
• ICPC: Gbajabiamila honoured invitation, not arrested
• Sowore demands Gbajabiamila interrogation video
• Lawyer seeks arrest of Gbajabiamila, AGF, HoS
• Falana reportedly quits alleged PFIPC boss’s defence

The House of Representatives Ad-hoc Committee investigating the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC) yesterday summoned the National Security Adviser (NSA), Nuhu Ribadu, to explain the actions taken by his office after it was alerted to the activities of the unestablished council in October 2025, while warning Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) that continued to ignore its summons would face constitutional sanctions.

The committee also insisted that the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Bianca Odumegwu-Ojukwu, must personally appear before it to clarify issues arising from the ministry’s submissions on the controversy.

It declared tomorrow the final opportunity for defaulting institutions to comply voluntarily, warning that any agency that fails to appear with the requested officials and documents would face all constitutional and statutory sanctions available to the House of Representatives for obstructing its investigation.

The summons followed revelations by the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Dunoma Umar Ahmed, that the ministry had reported the activities of the PFIPC and its self-acclaimed Director-General, Adeniyi Adeyemi, to the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) after discovering discrepancies in the organisation’s submitted documents.

Representing the minister before the committee chaired by Yusuf Gagdi, Ahmed disclosed that Adeyemi approached the ministry on three occasions, seeking its collaboration and endorsement to host a World Investment Summit in Nigeria.

He said the ministry declined all three requests after conducting due diligence and identifying inconsistencies in the documents submitted by the organisation.

According to Ahmed, the ministry subsequently wrote to the Office of the National Security Adviser on October 16, 2025, seeking clarification regarding Adeyemi’s status as Director-General of the PFIPC.

He said the ONSA responded on November 26, 2025, conveying that enquiries made with the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation and the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President established that Prince Adeyemi was unknown to any office of the Federal Government.

Ahmed told lawmakers that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs never participated in any diplomatic engagement, bilateral or multilateral discussions involving the PFIPC, nor did it facilitate foreign investors, partners or delegations on behalf of the council.

He also stated that there was no record of any Memorandum of Understanding or agreement signed between the council and any foreign government through the ministry.

According to him, no Nigerian mission abroad interacted with the council because the ministry never issued any directive recognising it.

“Flowing from the above, I wish to respectfully conclude by saying that the Ministry has never had any official interaction or engagement with the PFIPC or its alleged Director-General,” he said.

Reacting to the presentation, Gagdi questioned why stronger action was not taken after the National Security Adviser reportedly established that the council was unknown to the Federal Government.

He said the committee needed to determine what steps the nation’s security apparatus took after receiving the ministry’s report.

“It is now the duty of the committee to move further and invite the Office of the National Security Adviser to come and answer the very important question raised by Honourable Abubakar Fulata.

“The Ministry of Foreign Affairs received correspondence from this agency under investigation, suspected foul play and discrepancies, and wrote to the National Security Adviser.

“The NSA responded that it is an illegal agency. What has the Office of the National Security Adviser done as a security institution after that discovery? If they discovered that the agency does not exist, then appropriate action ought to have been taken. They should come before this committee and explain the actions they have taken,” Gagdi said.

The committee consequently directed Ribadu to appear before it tomorrow, while also insisting that the Minister of Foreign Affairs personally attend the hearing.

In a statement issued after the session, the panel described the persistent absence of some MDAs as “a serious affront” to the constitutional oversight powers of the House and an unacceptable disregard for the authority of Parliament.

“It must be clearly understood that invitations issued by a duly constituted Committee of the House of Representatives are not matters of discretion.

“They are issued pursuant to the constitutional powers vested in the National Assembly under Sections 88 and 89 of the Constitution. Compliance is therefore a legal obligation, not an act of courtesy,” the committee said.

It stressed that any Ministry, Department or Agency that fails to appear without lawful justification “will leave the committee with no alternative but to invoke every constitutional and statutory power available to the House of Representatives to compel compliance and ensure accountability.”

“The committee will not hesitate to recommend and pursue every sanction permitted by law against any person or institution that deliberately obstructs or frustrates this investigation,” it added.

The committee had earlier summoned the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, the Minister of Finance, the Accountant-General of the Federation, the Budget Office of the Federation, the Federal Character Commission and the National Salaries, Incomes and Wages Commission over issues relating to the operations and funding of the controversial council.

During the probe on Monday, the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation admitted it failed to adequately verify documents submitted by the council before issuing it an authorised establishment, while the Central Bank of Nigeria disclosed that it opened two foreign currency accounts for the council on the directive of the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation, although the accounts were never operated.

The committee maintained that the investigation is aimed at establishing the facts surrounding the controversial council, protecting the integrity of public administration and ensuring that no public institution operates outside the framework of the Constitution.

The PFIPC controversy erupted after the Presidency disowned the council and the Presidential Economic Advisory Council (PEAC), declaring that neither body was established by the Federal Government.

The Presidency subsequently accused Prince Adeyemi of using forged government documents to obtain official recognition from public institutions.

The House committee is investigating how the council allegedly secured official recognition across government agencies and was allocated funds in the 2026 Appropriation Act despite lacking legal backing.

Falana reportedly withdraws from defence
A NEW twist has emerged in the ongoing trial of the self-acclaimed Director-General of the disowned PFIPC, Adeyemi, amid indications that prominent human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana, may no longer be representing him.

Sources familiar with the matter, who requested anonymity because they were not authorised to speak publicly, disclosed that Falana has stepped back from Adeyemi’s defence in the case, which centres on allegations concerning the organisation’s operations and references to the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President.

Falana had earlier indicated his intention to represent Adeyemi. However, sources close to the proceedings said difficulties encountered in obtaining documents required for the defence may have influenced the senior lawyer’s decision to disengage.

According to the sources, several documents requested by the defence team were not made available, affecting preparations for the case.

It was further gathered that efforts had previously been made to ensure Adeyemi’s appearance in court, but he failed to attend earlier proceedings.

On July 14, 2026, Justice Mohammed Umar ordered Adeyemi’s arrest after he failed to appear for his scheduled arraignment on charges relating to the activities of the alleged fake PFIPC. His lawyer was also reportedly absent from the proceedings.

Justice Umar issued the arrest warrant following an oral application by the prosecution counsel, Wisdom Madaki.

Adeyemi was subsequently apprehended in Osun State after being declared wanted by law enforcement authorities.

As of press time, neither Falana nor his chambers had issued an official statement confirming his reported withdrawal from the case, and efforts to obtain his comments were unsuccessful.

The case has continued to attract public attention amid wider concerns over organisations allegedly presenting themselves as government-affiliated bodies without formal authorisation.

The matter was adjourned until September 30, 2026, for further hearing.

Gbajabiamila not arrested, only questioned over PFIPC scandal, says ICPC
THE Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) has dismissed reports that the Chief of Staff to President Bola Tinubu, Femi Gbajabiamila, was arrested in connection with the ongoing investigation into the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council scandal.

In a statement issued yesterday, ICPC spokesperson Demola Bakare said Gbajabiamila voluntarily honoured an invitation from investigators and was allowed to leave after responding to questions.

According to the commission, the former Speaker of the House of Representatives arrived at its headquarters in Abuja yesterday afternoon, spent some time with investigators and departed shortly afterwards.

“The Commission confirms that the Chief of Staff’s visit was on the invitation of its investigators and consistent with its ongoing efforts to gather all relevant facts in the matter. He was not arrested; he simply willingly honoured an invitation,” the statement said.

The anti-graft agency added that investigations into the PFIPC controversy were ongoing and that further updates would be provided when necessary.

On Monday, Gbajabiamila’s lawyer, Jiti Ogunye, disclosed that the presidential aide had appeared before the ICPC to answer questions over the alleged PFIPC scandal.

The investigation followed President Tinubu’s July 2 directive, ordering the ICPC to conduct a comprehensive probe into the controversy.

Presidential spokesman Bayo Onanuga had said the President instructed the commission to conclude its investigation and submit a detailed report within 30 days.

Release Gbajabiamila’s interrogation video on fake agency, Sowore tells ICPC
HUMAN rights activist and AAC presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore, has challenged the ICPC to release the full, unedited video of its interrogation of the President’s Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila, over the investigation into the alleged Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council.

Sowore made the demand yesterday in a post on X, dismissing the anti-graft agency’s explanation that Gbajabiamila merely honoured an invitation from investigators.

“If the ICPC truly interrogated Tinubu’s Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila, they should release the full, unedited video recording to the public now. All these gimmicks won’t work. We know this is just another smokescreen,” Sowore wrote.

Lawyer wants Gbajabiamila, Accountant-General, Head of Service arrested
ALSO, human rights lawyer and public affairs analyst, Maxwell Okpara, has said that Femi Gbajabiamila, the Accountant-General of the Federation, Shamseldeen Ogunjimi, and Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Esther Walson-Jack, should be arrested amid the contentious ‘fake’ agency scandal.

Okpara made the assertion yesterday while appearing on Arise Television, stating that no one is above the law.

“An office was given to the fake agency. An account was opened for the fake agency. Somebody was acting as a director in the fake agency, and the person said that money was given to some persons, and a lot of issues surrounded this particular investigation. Now the question is who are the suspects?

“We have the principal suspect, who is the fake director, so to say, or the alleged fake director, Mr Adeyemi Adeniyi, who is now with the police.

“There are some other suspects: Gbajabiamila, the AGF and HoS. All these people should be arrested. Now, tell us that you have invited the Chief of Staff to come and make a statement. Have they been arrested like the principal suspects?

“Please, nobody is above the law. None of all these persons is above the law. None of them is enjoying immunity. One expects that the proper thing to do is to arrest all of them,” Okpara said.