The presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress, Atiku Abubakar, has challenged President Bola Tinubu to identify government officials who allegedly helped the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council operate within the government system.
Atiku said the interim report of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission on the scandal did not clear the Presidency of wrongdoing, arguing that the findings had instead raised fresh questions about how a suspected impostor was able to gain access to government facilities and operate as a senior government official.
The former Vice President made the demand in a statement issued on Friday by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu.
He said the ICPC report, which reportedly identified negligence and possible “connivance” within government processes, could not be used to present the scandal as the work of a lone fraudster.
Atiku challenged the President to disclose the identities of officials whose actions or negligence may have allowed the alleged fraud to continue.
“If there was connivance, who connived? If public officers were negligent, who are they? Who granted access to government offices? Who recognised this supposed director-general? Who enabled him to operate within the machinery of government,” Atiku asked.
The ADC presidential candidate said the questions were important because the alleged scheme involved several government processes and could not have been carried out without people within the system either failing to do their duties or actively assisting the operation.
The controversy centres on Adeniyi Adeyemi, who allegedly presented himself as the director-general of the disputed Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council.
According to the allegations, Adeyemi forged a presidential appointment letter and used it to present himself as a government appointee.
He was also accused of creating a fictitious federal agency, taking over offices and official instruments previously associated with the Presidential Economic Advisory Council and opening bank accounts with allegedly forged legislative documents.
The allegations further included the creation of two other fictitious government agencies.
The matter became a major public issue after questions were raised about how the alleged fake agency was able to operate within official circles and secure access to government facilities and processes.
President Tinubu subsequently directed the ICPC on July 7, 2026, to conduct a comprehensive 30-day investigation into the controversy.
The directive came after weeks of public debate over the alleged activities of the disputed agency and the officials who may have interacted with it.
The ICPC’s investigation also attracted attention because senior government officials were mentioned in connection with some of the allegations.
The President’s Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila, appeared before the commission on July 20 to provide information as part of the investigation.
Gbajabiamila has since filed a N15 billion defamation suit against Adeyemi over allegations made against him.
Adeyemi, meanwhile, is already facing an eight-count criminal charge before the Federal High Court in Abuja.
The charges, filed by the police in November 2025, relate to allegations including conspiracy, forgery and impersonation.
He was rearrested in July after allegedly breaching his bail conditions and failing to appear for arraignment.
He is expected to return to the Federal High Court later this month.
The controversy has also attracted the attention of the National Assembly.
The House of Representatives launched a separate investigation into how the disputed agency was able to secure a N1.3 billion allocation in the 2026 Appropriation Act.
The alleged inclusion of the allocation has further raised questions about the checks and approval processes within government and the legislature.
Atiku argued that the reported activities could not have taken place without failures at different levels of the government system.
“A fake agency does not walk into government offices by itself. A forged appointment letter does not validate itself. Bank accounts do not open themselves.
“Behind every door that opened, every process that was bypassed and every official instrument that was accessed was a human being. Name them,” he said.
He also pointed to reports that the ICPC recommended sanctions against public officers whose negligence may have helped the alleged scheme.
According to him, such a recommendation makes it even more important for the government to disclose the identities and roles of the officials involved.
Atiku accused the Presidency of trying to use the interim nature of the ICPC report to protect officials who may have played a role in the affair.
“What the ICPC Interim Report has done, in the main, is to shield the identities of shadow operatives within the presidency who allegedly connived to enable the fraud.
“Their identities should be made public, and their roles fully explained. Nigerians deserve to know who did what, who authorised what, and who opened the doors that made this possible,” he said.
The former Vice President maintained that an interim report could not be treated as a final clearance of the Presidency, particularly when investigations into alleged collaborators and related bank accounts were still ongoing.
He therefore renewed his call for an independent panel of inquiry to carry out a wider investigation into the controversy.
Atiku also called on the National Assembly to conduct a public hearing into the matter and broadcast the proceedings live.
His demand followed an invitation reportedly extended to Adeyemi to appear before a National Assembly investigative panel.
The ADC candidate said the invitation provided an opportunity for the government to demonstrate its commitment to transparency by allowing witnesses to appear publicly and testify under oath.
“The presidency now has nowhere left to hide. If Mr Adeyemi is prepared to appear publicly, testify under oath, and answer questions before Nigerians, then let him be heard.
“The National Assembly should immediately institute an open, live-broadcast public hearing into this scandal,” he said.
Atiku urged the Presidency not to shield anyone connected with the alleged fraud, arguing that a public hearing would help Nigerians understand how the disputed agency operated and how it was able to gain access to official structures.
He said the government should have no reason to oppose a transparent investigation if it had nothing to hide.
“If the villa is truly clean, it should be the first to welcome live television coverage. Let Nigerians watch, unedited, as the witnesses testify, and the evidence is presented under oath. What is the presidency afraid of?” Atiku asked.
He warned that anything short of a transparent public hearing could increase suspicion that powerful individuals were being protected.
The controversy has also raised wider concerns about weaknesses in government checks and controls, particularly the processes used to verify appointments, government agencies, official documents and access to public facilities.
Government agencies are expected to have systems for confirming the authenticity of appointments and official documents before individuals are granted access to sensitive offices, funds or government instruments.
The allegations surrounding the PFIPC have therefore generated questions about whether such safeguards were properly followed in this case.
For Atiku, the issue goes beyond the alleged activities of Adeyemi and concerns the officials who may have allowed the disputed agency to operate.
“You cannot admit negligence and connivance within government and simultaneously pronounce the system spotless. That is like washing charcoal and expecting white water,” he said.
As the ICPC investigation and related legal proceedings continue, attention is expected to remain focused on whether other individuals will be identified and held responsible.
The National Assembly’s proposed investigation could also provide another avenue for questioning those involved and examining how the disputed agency allegedly secured official recognition and public funds.
For now, the government faces pressure to explain the circumstances surrounding the controversy, while Adeyemi continues to face criminal proceedings and other legal challenges.