Senate prefers ICPC Investigation results, Adeyemi insists Gbajabiamila's greed caused conflict

 

The Senate decided on Wednesday to wait for the results of an ongoing investigation by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offenses Commission (ICPC) rather than look into the alleged Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) inclusion in the 2026 Appropriations Act.

Following a resolution by Senator Kawu Sumaila (APC, Kano South) requesting a probe into how the alleged agency acquired a N1.3 billion allocation in the 2026 national budget, the decision was made during plenary.

The development occurs one day after President Bola Tinubu ordered the ICPC to carry out a thorough inquiry into the operations of the purported PFIPC, which the Federal Government has insisted was never established and lacks legal support.

Sumaila contended in his plea that the dispute surrounding the purported agency had cast doubt on the legitimacy of Nigeria's appropriations and budget planning procedures.

"The presidency has taken up this matter by ordering the ICPC to thoroughly investigate how this matter came to be, as I previously stated." 

Before passing any legislation, the Senate should let the anti-graft agency finish its work, according to Barau. Additionally, I believe ICPC has begun. I think that at this point, we should obtain the ICPC report so that we can act upon it and handle it as we see fit.

 Adeniyi Matthew openly questioned the Presidency's claim that the PFIPC never existed, the debate surrounding the organization intensified.

He pointed out that the PFIPC was still included in the 2026 Appropriations Act under Budget Code 0111062001 with a N1.3 billion grant, even though the Presidency had openly disowned the organization.

"The Senate observes that the entire organization was included in the 2026 Appropriations Act under Code 0111062001 with a budgetary allocation of N1.3 billion, despite the executive's public disapproval of this agency."

In order to ascertain whether any monies had been released or spent under the budget line, he requested the Senate to look into how the budget plan was presented, examined, and approved.

In response, the session's chair, Deputy Senate President Barau Jibrin, stated that the Presidency has already started looking into the issue through the ICPC.

At a press conference last week, Adeyemi demanded an independent investigation into the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) and the Presidential Economic Advisory Council (PEAC), accusing Chief of Staff to the President Femi Gbajabiamila of making contradictory remarks. In relation to his alleged hiring, he also claimed that Gbajabiamila wanted money, saying the Chief of Staff collected N400 million through middlemen and asked for an extra N200 million. 

Gbajabiamila has continuously denied any involvement, and the accusations have not been proven. Adeyemi also questioned the President's contention that the PFIPC did not exist, claiming that the 2026 Appropriations Act had references to both the PFIPC and the Presidential Economic Advisory Council. This assertion has sparked calls for for further scrutiny of the budget process.

Beyond Adeyemi Adeniyi Matthew's actions, President Tinubu's order to the ICPC aims to fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the purportedly fraudulent organization.

The anti-corruption commission has been tasked with looking into allegations of presidential appointments that may have been used to secure official recognition, diplomatic support, and visa facilitation, as well as the veracity of appointment letters and other official government documents purportedly used by those responsible for the scheme.

The investigation will also look into the creation and management of bank accounts associated with the alleged agency, track the flow of any funds related to the issue, and ascertain whether public servants, financial institutions, middlemen, or private individuals were involved in any way in enabling or justifying the alleged activities.

In addition to identifying the individuals directly involved, the President instructed the ICPC to examine any flaws in government processes that would have given the purported plan legitimacy and suggest changes to stop future occurrences of this kind.

All Federal Government Ministries, Departments, and Agencies have been directed to help the inquiry by giving the commission all pertinent records, papers, and support needed to finish the probe on time.

Who registered Ghosts? Is Nigeria still committed to transparency, accountability, and the rule of law.?

 

The revelation that the so-called Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council allegedly received a ₦1.3 billion budget allocation, operated bank accounts with the Central Bank of Nigeria, secured approval to recruit hundreds of staff, and held meetings with ministers, diplomats, and lawmakers despite the Presidency reportedly insisting that the body never legally existed should alarm every Nigerian.

If these claims are established through a transparent investigation, this is not merely an administrative error. It represents a profound assault on the rule of law and the integrity of public finance.

Government institutions exist because they derive their authority from law. A public agency cannot simply materialize through letters, meetings, or political influence. It must have a clear legal foundation defining its mandate, powers, funding, and accountability. If an organization without lawful existence was allowed to function within the machinery of government, then someone deliberately opened the door.

That is why this matter deserves to be treated as a potential criminal issue rather than an ordinary bureaucratic controversy.

Every official who authorized budgetary allocations, approved recruitment, facilitated banking arrangements, endorsed official correspondence, or represented the purported agency in government meetings should be subjected to an independent investigation. If wrongdoing is established, prosecutions should follow without fear or favor. Accountability cannot stop with junior civil servants while senior officials escape scrutiny.

Nigeria is currently confronting some of the gravest security challenges in its history. Kidnapping, banditry, terrorism, oil theft, cybercrime, and organized corruption continue to drain public resources and undermine citizens' confidence in government. In such circumstances, the state must demonstrate that it is governed by law.

A government cannot credibly ask citizens to obey the law while elements within its own system appear to disregard the very legal framework they are sworn to uphold.

Evil cannot be used to fight evil. Two wrongs will never produce justice.

Nigeria depends heavily on intelligence sharing, financial cooperation, and security partnerships with foreign governments and international organizations in combating terrorism and transnational crime. These relationships are built not only on military cooperation but also on trust in public institutions.

If reports emerge that a legally nonexistent body could allegedly access public funds, interact with diplomats, recruit staff, and operate as though it were an established government institution, it inevitably raises difficult questions about institutional oversight.

International partners expect transparency, credible financial controls, and strong governance. Weak accountability risks damaging confidence in Nigeria's institutions at a time when deeper cooperation is essential to defeating terrorism and organized crime.

This is why the issue extends beyond domestic politics. It concerns Nigeria's credibility before the international community.

The fundamental question is simple: Who keeps the register of government?

If ministries, agencies, banks, legislators, and diplomats can all engage with an entity that allegedly has no legal existence, then the safeguards designed to protect public resources require urgent examination. Systems intended to prevent fraud, abuse, and institutional impersonation must be strengthened.

The Nigerian people deserve clear answers.

Who proposed the council?

Who approved its activities?

Who authorized its budget?

Who approved its recruitment?

Who permitted it to operate financial accounts?

Who supervised its engagements with public officials?

These are questions that only an independent and transparent investigation can answer.

No democracy can afford "ghost institutions" exercising real governmental powers. If public institutions become vulnerable to such irregularities, confidence in governance steadily erodes.

This moment therefore presents an opportunity. Nigeria can either dismiss the controversy as another passing scandal or demonstrate that no individual is above the law.

If investigations confirm that laws were broken, every person responsible regardless  of office, status, or political affiliations should face the full weight of the law. Accountability is not an act of political persecution; it is the foundation upon which public trust, national security, and democratic governance are built.

The fight against corruption cannot succeed if corruption itself is tolerated within the institutions entrusted to combat it. A nation cannot effectively confront kidnappers, terrorists, and criminal syndicates while turning a blind eye to alleged abuses within its own administrative system.

Justice demands consistency. The law must apply equally to every citizen and every public official.

Only then can Nigeria convince both its people and the international community that it remains committed to transparency, accountability, and the rule of law.