The controversy surrounding the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council deepened on Sunday as its detained self-styled Director-General, Adeniyi Adeyemi, insisted that his lawyers and journalists must be present when he appears before the House of Representatives panel investigating the matter.
The House Ad Hoc Committee, headed by Yusuf Gagdi, has yet to settle the venue for Adeyemi’s interrogation, despite plans to question him this week.
Adeyemi’s demand came amid growing questions over how the PFIPC allegedly obtained official recognition, occupied space within the Federal Secretariat Complex, and secured more than N1.32bn in the 2026 Appropriation Act despite claims that the council had no legal backing.
A source familiar with the committee’s proceedings confirmed that lawmakers had not decided where Adeyemi would be questioned as of Sunday.
Adeyemi’s family and lawyer have previously objected to attempts to interrogate him while in police custody without his legal representatives present.
His lawyer, Ademola Oyedokun, also argued that his client should be allowed to respond publicly to allegations that had been made against him in public.
According to the lawyer, Adeyemi was not opposed to the investigation but wanted the process conducted transparently and with his legal team present.
The committee had earlier attempted to question Adeyemi in police custody, but he reportedly declined to answer questions in the absence of his lawyers. The lawmakers subsequently rescheduled the session.
A family source said Adeyemi later informed the committee that he would only participate if journalists and his lawyers were permitted to attend.
The House panel’s decision on the matter comes after it heard from several senior officials, including the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Didi Walson-Jack; Budget Office Director-General, Tanimu Yakubu; and representatives of the Central Bank of Nigeria and the Nigeria Police Force.
The testimonies are expected to assist the lawmakers in determining how Adeyemi allegedly operated the PFIPC and gained access to government institutions and official processes.
Meanwhile, the Coalition of United Political Parties has called for a wider investigation, faulting the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission’s handling of the matter.
CUPP spokesperson, Agu Bryan, argued that the controversy could not be adequately explained by focusing solely on Adeyemi.
He questioned how an organisation that investigators reportedly described as lacking legal existence could have secured a budgetary provision, office accommodation and access to various government institutions.
Bryan said the investigation should establish whether officials within the Presidency, ministries and government agencies enabled the PFIPC to function.
He specifically called for scrutiny of the roles allegedly played by the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation and the CBN.
The CUPP spokesperson also questioned how the PFIPC’s budgetary allocation passed through the government’s budget process without its legal status being adequately verified.
He said the National Assembly and relevant government agencies should explain the procedures through which the controversial budget provision was processed.
The coalition further urged investigators to examine claims concerning the alleged recruitment of hundreds of workers and Adeyemi’s reported participation in official government activities.
Bryan said the investigation should go beyond determining whether documents were forged and establish how the alleged documents were accepted and acted upon by public institutions.
The controversy was heightened by an allegation that a signature attributed to the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, was forged.
CUPP said the development warranted a wider examination of other documents and correspondence allegedly used by Adeyemi in his dealings with government institutions.
The coalition also questioned how the PFIPC allegedly acquired sufficient recognition to appear in the national budget and operate within government circles.
However, Bryan stressed that Adeyemi should be given an opportunity to defend himself before the lawmakers and respond directly to the allegations against him.
He argued that hearing from Adeyemi could help investigators determine whether the alleged activities were carried out solely by him or whether other individuals and institutions were involved.
The police have indicated that lawmakers can gain access to Adeyemi in custody if they meet the necessary requirements.
Police spokesperson, Ani Ineidu, said persons in custody were entitled to visitors subject to the fulfilment of the required conditions and authorisations.
The House committee had earlier said it would question Adeyemi at a location to be determined while he remained in police custody.
Gagdi explained that the arrangement was designed to prevent the legislative inquiry from interfering with investigations being conducted by the police, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and the ICPC.
He also said the lawmakers could not disregard any court order under which Adeyemi was being detained.
The committee is investigating allegations relating to the establishment and activities of the PFIPC, including claims of impersonation, forgery, financial impropriety and unauthorised use of government facilities and insignia.
Adeyemi’s eventual appearance before the lawmakers is expected to provide an opportunity for him to respond directly to the allegations and for the committee to further establish how the controversial council operated within government structures.
0 Comments