The House of Representatives has launched a full investigation into the controversy surrounding the alleged funding of a government agency that the Presidency says does not exist, raising fresh concerns about the integrity of Nigeria’s 2026 budget.
The House on Tuesday set up an ad hoc committee to investigate claims that more than ₦1.3 billion was allocated in the 2026 Appropriation Act to the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC), an agency whose legal status has become the subject of a major public dispute.
The committee has been directed to invite the Minister of Budget and Economic Planning, the Director-General of the Budget Office, and other relevant government officials to explain how the agency was included in the budget and whether due process was followed.
The lawmakers will also receive briefings from security agencies and anti-corruption bodies as part of the investigation, while ensuring that their inquiry does not interfere with ongoing court proceedings linked to the matter.
The decision followed a motion of urgent public importance moved by the member representing Pankshin/Kanke/Kanam Federal Constituency of Plateau State, Yusuf Gagdi.
Moving the motion, Gagdi expressed concern over reports that more than ₦1.3 billion had been appropriated to an agency that the Federal Government does not officially recognise.
He said the allegations, if established, would raise serious questions about transparency, accountability and the credibility of Nigeria’s budget process.
According to him, Parliament has a constitutional responsibility to investigate the matter and ensure that public funds are not allocated to non-existent institutions.
Lawmakers who contributed to the debate described the allegations as disturbing and warned that the issue must be thoroughly investigated to protect public confidence in government spending.
They insisted that anyone found to have manipulated the budget process or abused public office should be made to face the full weight of the law.
Deputy Speaker Benjamin Kalu also supported the investigation, saying the House must establish the facts and protect the integrity of public institutions.
Kalu’s support came amid public attention over photographs showing him with the man at the centre of the controversy, Adeniyi Adeyemi, who claims to be the Director-General of the PFIPC.
Addressing the House, Kalu explained that his office had received official correspondence from the organisation, which presented itself as a Presidency-linked body operating from the Federal Secretariat in Abuja.
He said the documents received by his office appeared to portray the organisation as a legitimate government agency, making it necessary for the House to determine the true position.
The controversy has dominated public discussion in recent weeks following conflicting claims by Adeyemi and the Presidency over whether the PFIPC actually exists.
Adeyemi insists that he was lawfully appointed as Director-General of what he described as the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council.
He has argued that the agency is genuine because it appeared in the 2026 national budget and therefore cannot be dismissed as fictitious.
He further alleged that the President’s Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila, received ₦400 million through a proxy and later demanded another ₦200 million to facilitate his appointment as Director-General.
Adeyemi has maintained that he is prepared to defend his claims before the courts and has called on President Bola Tinubu to set up an independent panel to investigate the allegations.
He believes only an independent inquiry can establish the truth behind the controversy and restore public confidence.
However, the Presidency has firmly rejected Adeyemi’s claims.
The Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, described Adeyemi as an impostor who falsely claimed to head a government agency that does not exist.
According to the Presidency, investigations revealed that Adeyemi allegedly forged appointment documents, impersonated a government official, fraudulently opened an account with the Central Bank of Nigeria in the name of the agency and operated under a non-existent government institution.
The Presidency also disclosed that police investigations resulted in an eight-count criminal charge against Adeyemi and two other suspects.
The criminal case is expected to come up for hearing on July 27.
The legal battle has widened beyond the criminal charges.
Gbajabiamila has also threatened legal action against Adeyemi over allegations linking him to bribery and murder.
In a letter signed by his lawyer, Kemi Pinheiro (SAN), the President’s Chief of Staff demanded that Adeyemi immediately withdraw all videos, publications and online comments containing the allegations.
The letter also asked him to publish a full retraction and apology in at least five national newspapers and across his social media platforms within 72 hours.
In addition, Adeyemi was asked to undertake not to repeat what Gbajabiamila described as false and defamatory allegations.
Pinheiro described the accusations as malicious, reckless and completely lacking any factual basis.
He warned that failure to comply with the demands would lead to a ₦10 billion defamation lawsuit as well as a criminal defamation complaint under the applicable laws of the Federal Capital Territory.
The House investigation is expected to focus on how the disputed agency found its way into the national budget and whether any government officials were involved in the process.
The outcome could have significant implications for Nigeria’s budget system, which has faced repeated criticism over alleged insertions of projects and agencies without proper approval.
Budget integrity has remained a major issue in Nigeria over the years, with concerns often raised about unauthorised allocations, duplicated projects and spending provisions that do not pass through proper scrutiny.
Lawmakers said the current investigation offers an opportunity to strengthen accountability and reassure Nigerians that public funds are being managed transparently.
The ad hoc committee is expected to submit its findings after hearing from budget officials, security agencies, anti-corruption institutions and other stakeholders connected to the controversy.
Its report could help determine whether the PFIPC was legally established, how it appeared in the 2026 budget and whether any criminal or administrative actions should follow.
With criminal proceedings already before the courts and fresh legislative scrutiny now underway, the PFIPC controversy has become one of the most closely watched issues surrounding the implementation of Nigeria’s 2026 budget.