| How we discovered 58 accounts, 12 other agencies linked to Adeyemi
The House of Representatives Ad-hoc Committee investigating the alleged Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) has said Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, was not the focus of its investigation, stressing that its mandate was to establish how the purported agency found its way into the Federal Government’s structure and budget.
Chairman of the committee, Hon. Yusuf Gagdi, speaking on the committee’s preliminary report which was presented on Wednesday at the National Assembly during an interview on Arise TV, said the panel found no basis to indict Gbajabiamila after examining documents and records submitted by relevant government agencies.
Gagdi said the committee’s mandate was broader than investigating individuals, explaining that it was tasked with determining whether the agency had legal backing, whether its appointment and authorisation documents were genuine and how it was incorporated into the Federal Government’s system.
“Our priority is not even about Prince Adeyemi and Femi Gbajabiamila. Our priority was to call the agencies concerned and ask: how can an institution not established by law find itself into the Nigerian Federal Government system, to the extent of having accommodation and being captured in the budget?” he said.
According to him, the committee summoned the Minister of Budget and National Planning, the Director-General of the Budget Office and the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, while also seeking information from security and anti-graft agencies.
He said documents obtained from the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Department of State Services (DSS) and the Nigeria Police Force revealed that investigations into Adeyemi and the purported agency were already underway.
Gagdi explained that the documents enabled the committee to establish that key documents allegedly used to legitimise the agency were forged.
“We discovered that the Act that was presented to us by the agencies we invited never existed as an Act of Parliament of Nigeria. Neither the Senate nor the House of Representatives had ever sponsored any Act establishing the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council,” he said.
He added that the letter purportedly authorising the agency’s take-off from the Presidency and the appointment letter issued to Adeyemi were also found to be forged.
On why Gbajabiamila was not summoned for questioning, Gagdi said the committee was guided by evidence and its terms of reference, rather than a desire to make any individual the centre of the investigation.
“Our mandate was not to focus on an individual. Where we have a petition or memorandum against any individual, we summon that individual or meet that individual to establish the facts,” he said.
The lawmaker also disclosed that the committee uncovered a network of bank accounts and organisations allegedly linked to Adeyemi.
“We discovered that he had opened different accounts amounting to 58 different accounts, out of which the accounts belonged to 12 different agencies. All linked to his BVN,” Gagdi said.
He said the discovery formed part of the committee’s preliminary investigation into possible accomplices and financial activities connected to the purported agency.
Gagdi, however, stressed that the report currently being prepared was preliminary, noting that the committee was still working to establish the full extent of the network and determine the roles played by individuals or institutions involved.
He said the committee would provide further details in its final report, including how a purportedly fake Director-General was able to open multiple bank accounts associated with different organisations.
On the allegation that the committee’s investigation could amount to interference in a matter already before the courts, Gagdi disagreed.
“We did not investigate what is before the court. We investigated how the budget came into the Federal Republic of Nigeria. There is nothing before the court as regards whether that agency is lawful or unlawful,” he said.
According to him, the court case concerns the alleged fraudulent activities of Adeyemi, while the House investigation focused on the administrative, legal and budgetary processes through which the purported agency entered the government system.
Gagdi also rejected suggestions that the House was incapable of independently investigating the matter because it is part of government.
“Are we under anybody? Is it the Presidency that put together the committee?” he asked, insisting that the committee was constituted through the established parliamentary process following a motion adopted by the House.
He further dismissed suggestions that the scandal exposed a failure of legislative oversight, saying the primary responsibility for verifying the legality of agencies seeking inclusion in the budget rests with the executive before proposals are transmitted to the National Assembly.
“Ours is to scrutinise allocation of funds in the budget. If they present their budget, it is not the responsibility of the National Assembly to start asking every agency: are you legal or illegal?” he said.
Gagdi said the committee was working to complete a comprehensive report for presentation to the House when plenary resumes, promising that the findings would provide Nigerians with a clearer picture of how the purported agency operated within government structures.