Connect with us

News

Sylva, five others arraigned, officers’ wives seek justice over alleged coup plot

Published

3 months ago

on

The Federal Government will on Wednesday (today) arraign six individuals, including two retired senior military officers and a serving police inspector, before the Federal High Court in Abuja over an alleged coup plot to wage war against Nigeria and overthrow the President.

The defendants — retired Major General Mohammed Ibrahim Gana, retired Naval Captain Erasmus Ochegobia Victor, Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim, Zekeri Umoru, Bukar Kashim Goni and Abdulkadir Sani — are billed to appear before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik.

Also named in the charge but said to be at large is former Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, Timipre Sylva.

The defendants are facing 13 counts bordering on conspiracy, attempt to commit treason, terrorism, failure to disclose security intelligence, financing terrorism and money laundering.

The charge, filed on Monday by the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and signed by the Director of Public Prosecutions, Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), accused them of offences ranging from alleged attempts to overthrow the government to terrorism-related financing.

According to the prosecution, the defendants allegedly conspired in 2025 “to levy war against the state to overpower the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

They are also accused of failing to report alleged knowledge of a planned treasonable act involving one Colonel Mohammed Alhassan Ma’aji and others.

The government further alleged that the defendants “knowing that a treasonable act was intended to be committed, did not give information thereof with all reasonable despatch to either the President… or a Peace Officer.”

They were also accused of failing to prevent the alleged offence, stating that they “did not use any reasonable endeavours to prevent the commission of the offence.”

Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim and Zekeri Umoru were also accused of attending meetings allegedly linked to the plot “in a bid to further a political ideology which may seriously destabilise the constitutional structure of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

The charge further alleged that the defendants “knowingly and indirectly, rendered support” for acts of terrorism and also failed to disclose critical intelligence to security agencies.

Abdulkadir Sani was accused of receiving N2m on September 23, 2025, while Bukar Kashim Goni allegedly retained N50m from accounts linked to A & A Express Link Concept.

Zekeri Umoru was also accused of receiving N10m cash from Colonel Ma’aji and retaining N8.8m in his account, while Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim allegedly received N1m from the same source.

The offences, according to the charge, contravene Sections 37(2), 40(b), 26(1), 2(3)(d), 12(a), 13(1)(a), and 16(1)(a)(b) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, as well as provisions of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

Alleged coup probe

The development comes amid widening investigations into an alleged coup plot that has already led to arrests within the military and security circles.

In October 2025, the Federal Government cancelled the Independence Day parade, a move later linked in reports to the alleged plot.

The Defence Headquarters, however, dismissed any connection.

Weeks later, authorities confirmed the arrest of 16 military officers, while two others were declared wanted.

In January 2026, the Defence Headquarters confirmed that an internal investigation had established a plan to overthrow President Bola Tinubu, adding that suspects would face military disciplinary panels.

Families of detained officers have since staged protests and demanded transparency, access to their relatives, and speedy trial.

Court martial

Meanwhile, The PUNCH gathered that the military has set up a court martial to try serving personnel allegedly implicated in the case.

The serving military personnel reportedly detained are Brig Gen M. A. Sadiq, Col M. A. Maaji, Lt Col S. Bappah, Lt Col A. A. Hayatu, Lt Col P. Dangnap, Lt Col M. Almakura, Maj A. J. Ibrahim, Maj M. M. Jiddah, Maj M. A. Usman, Maj D. Yusuf, Capt I. Bello, Capt A. A. Yusuf, Lt S. S. Felix, Lt Cdr D. B. Abdullahi, Sqn Ldr S. B. Adamu and Maj I. Dauda.

Reliable sources confirmed that the panel will be constituted today to begin proceedings.

It was also gathered that detained officers have, for the first time since their arrest, been granted access to their lawyers.

Wives demand clarity, fairness

One of the campaigners for the detained officers’ families, Nana Usman, said there was confusion over who was being arraigned in court and who would face military trial.

Nana is wife to one of the detained senior officers, Lt. Col Sadiq Mohammed.

She said, “Our husbands are not among those being taken to the Federal High Court tomorrow (today). Those are retired military men and top police officers from what we heard.

See also  UK contractor details luxury property, unpaid bills during Diezani trial

“We heard our spouses will face a court-martial from tomorrow (today). I may not be able to say much until we see how proceedings go. That’s also partly because there is no official communication from the military.

“We were only to bring their lawyers to see them today (Tuesday) and prepare ahead for the trial. But whatever it is, we just hope the judgment will be fair. I am also surprised to see them grant the lawyers access to finally see them seven months after their arrest.

“Remember when we (serving officers wives) granted an interview with The PUNCH, we told you specifically that members of their families and the lawyers were denied access to see them.

“Although allowing them access to their lawyers is a good development, we are just hoping they will be fair in their judgment.”

Wives and relatives of detained officers have continued protests, demanding fair trial and access to their loved ones, insisting that they have been held without clear communication for months.

They maintain that their demand is for justice and transparency, not interference in judicial processes.

Recently, children of some of the detained officers staged a peaceful protest at the National Assembly, calling for a speedy trial and the release of their fathers. The young demonstrators held placards with inscriptions such as “Don’t Kill Our Daddies,” “Detention Without Trial is Injustice,” and “Six Months of Torture: Enough Is Enough.”

“I find this whole coup allegation very surprising. I still don’t believe that my husband can be explained into even doing what he is being accused of. He’s someone who really holds his family values very dearly. He does not want anything that would dent his reputation or his family values,” Lt Col M. A. Al-Makura’s wife Shafa’atu Ali Agbo, said.

Possible death penalty – SANs

Senior lawyers have weighed in on the possible consequences facing the defendants if convicted.

Mike Ahamba (SAN) said treason-related offences attracted the most severe punishments under the Nigerian law.

“Every treasonable trial case could carry a death sentence or life imprisonment or long term imprisonment, depending on the facts of this case. If it’s treason, it’s a very serious offense in any country, and that’s exactly what they are facing.

“It depends on what they are charged with and what evidence they have against them. Those who heard and did not report may not get the same sentence as those who participated in planning the coup. They are all offenses.

So let us listen to the evidence they have against them, that’s what’s important,” he stated.

Bankole Akomolafe (SAN) also shared his view.

“It is a death sentence (if found guilty) even though the judge may exercise his power to commute it to a life sentence. But generally, treason attracts death sentence,” he said.

He explained that the judge may decide to issue a lesser sentence on defendants who only committed borderline offenses, adding however that under the criminal code, the death sentence had not been abrogated for those with more severe offenses.

“If you look at our criminal code since they are going to try them at the Federal High Court, if anybody is able to prove that his own is a borderline, not fully involved, the judge may apply discretion to give them lesser sentence – long term imprisonment like 20, 15, 10 years and so on.

“But those that will be found directly culpable and all that, it doesn’t matter that they are under a civilian regime, death sentence has not been abrogated from our law, even though the Judges are skeptical and the state governors too. But it is still part of our law. The maximum sentence is death,” Akomolafe stated.

Other senior lawyers, including Sam Erugo (SAN), Olu Daramola (SAN) and Aare Isiaka Olagunju (SAN), also said the accused could face death penalty if convicted of treason, though appellate rights remain intact.

Erugo stressed that conviction would depend on whether treason or a lesser offence is proven, while Daramola noted that punishment would vary based on established charges.

Olagunju added that treason remains a capital offence under Nigerian law.

“If they are found guilty, they will be sentenced to death if the charge is treason. That is the oldest provision in our criminal law, dating back to the pre-independence era and retained in the Criminal Code Act,” he said.

According to him, defendants in such serious criminal cases retain the right of appeal up to the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, which must be exhausted before any sentence can be carried out.

See also  Fire-ravaged Lagos airport old terminal to be demolished – Keyamo

“It will not be like a military process. This is a regular court. They will go through the Court of Appeal and up to the Supreme Court,” he said.

He added that the determination of punishment ultimately depends on the exact legal charge proven in court, particularly whether the prosecution secures a conviction for treason rather than a lesser related offence.

Similarly, Olu Daramola, SAN, said that the fate of individuals accused of plotting to overthrow the government will depend on the specific offence established against them under Nigerian law.

Speaking in a telephone interview ahead of the suspects’ planned arraignment, Daramola explained that while treason-related offences are treated with utmost seriousness, the applicable punishment varies depending on the nature of the charge.

“They are going to be arraigned tomorrow. If the prosecution succeeds and they are convicted, whether they will be sentenced to death or life imprisonment depends on the offence proved,” he said.

“The kind of treason where people are plotting to overthrow the government can actually attract a death sentence,” he added.

However, the senior lawyer expressed uncertainty over whether the current legal framework differs significantly from the military-era decrees under which past coup plotters were tried.

Also the Chairman of Egbe Amofin Oodua, Aare Isiaka Olagunju (SAN), said that if the defendants are found guilty of plotting a coup in Nigeria they may face the death penalty, in line with existing criminal laws.

Olagunju, said the law is clear on the punishment for treason, noting that where the prosecution successfully proves such a charge, the court is empowered to impose the maximum penalty.

“The law provides for death sentence in cases of treason. Where such an offence is established before the court, the punishment is clearly spelt out,” he said.

The senior lawyer further noted that while the law prescribes strict penalties, any accused person would still be entitled to a fair hearing and the full benefit of the judicial process.

CHARGES AGAINST DEFENDANTS

COUNT 1

“That you, MAJOR GENERAL MOHAMMED IBRAHIM GANA -(RTD), CAPTAIN (NN) ERASMUS OCHEGOBIA VICTOR -(RTD), INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM(AP776373), ZEKERI UMORU, BUKAR KASHIM GONI, ABDULKADIR SANI, TIMPRE SYLVA (still at large) and others, sometime in the year 2025, in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, conspired with one another to levy war against the state to overawe the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 37(2) of the Criminal Code Cap C38 LFN 2004.

COUNT 2

“That you, MAJOR GENERAL MOHAMMED IBRAHIM GANA -(RTD), CAPTAIN (NN) ERASMUS OCHEGOBIA VICTOR -(RTD), INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM(AP776373), ZEKERI UMORU, BUKAR KASHIM ONI, ABDULKADIR SANI, TIMPRE SYLVA(still at large) and others, sometime in the year 2025, in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this hourable Court, knowing that COLONEL MOHAMMED ALHASSAN MA’AJI (N/10668) and others intended to commit treason, did not give he information thereof with all reasonable despatch to either the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, or a Peace Officer and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 40(b) of the Criminal Code Cap C38 LFN 2004.

COUNT 3

“That you, MAJOR GENERAL MOHAMMED IBRAHIM GANA -(RTD), CAPTAIN (NN) ERASMUS OCHEGOBIA VICTOR -(RTD), INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM(AP776373), ZEKERI UMORU, BUKAR KASHIM GONI, ABDULKADIR SANI, TIMPRE SYLVA(still at large) and others, sometime in the year 2025, in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, knowing that COLONEL MOHAMMED ALHASSAN MA‘AJI (N/10668), and others intended to commit treason, did not use any reasonable endeavours to prevent the commission of the offence and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 40(b) of the Criminal Code Cap C 38 (LFN) 2004.

COUNT 4

“That you MAJOR GENERAL MOHAMMED IBRAHIM GANA -(RTD), CAPTAIN (NN) ERASMUS OCHEGOBIA VICTOR -(RTD), INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM(AP776373), ZEKERI UMORU, BUKAR KASHIM GONI, ABDULKADIR SANI, TIMPRE SYLVA(still at large) and others, sometime in the year 2025 in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, conspired with one another to commit an act of terrorism in the Federal Republic of Nigeria and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 26(1) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

COUNT 5

“That you, INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM(AP 776373) AND ZEKERI UMORU, sometime in the year 2025 in Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, in a bid to further a political ideology which may seriously destabilize the constitutional structure of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, knowingly participated in meetings connected with an act of terrorism and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Sections 2(3)(d) and 12(a) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

See also  Immigration boss suspends Lagos-Seme border commanders over extortion allegations

COUNT 6

“That you, MAJOR GENERAL MOHAMMED IBRAHIM GANA -(RTD), CAPTAIN (NN) ERASMUS OCHEGOBIA VICTOR -(RTD), INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM(AP 776373), ZEKERI UMORU, BUKAR KASHIM GONI, ABDULKADIR SANI, AND TIMPRE SYLVA(still at large), sometime in the year 2025, in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court knowingly and indirectly, rendered support to COLONEL MOHAMMED ALHASSAN MA‘AJI (N/10668) and others, to commit an act of terrorism, and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 13(1) (a) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

COUNT 7

“That you, MAJOR GENERAL MOHAMMED IBRAHIM GANA -(RTD), CAPTAIN (NN) ERASMUS OCHEGOBIA VICTOR -(RTD), INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM(AP 776373), ZEKERI UMORU, BUKAR KASHIM GONI, ABDULKADIR SANI, AND TIMPRE SYLVA(still at large), sometime in the year 2025, in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court had information which you knew would be of material assistance in pventing the commission of the act of terrorism by COLONEL OHAMMED ALHASSAN MA’AJI (N/10668), and others, failed to lose the information to the relevant agency as soon as practicable, and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 6(1)(a) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

COUNT 8

“That you, MAJOR GENERAL MOHAMMED IBRAHIM GANA -(RTD), CAPTAIN (NN) ERASMUS OCHEGOBIA VICTOR -(RTD), INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM(AP 776373), ZEKERI UMORU, BUKAR KASHIM GONI, ABDULKADIR SANI, AND TIMPRE SYLVA(still at large), sometime in the year 2025, in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court had information which you knew would be of material assistance to securing the apprehension of COLONEL MOHAMMED ALHASSAN MA’AJI (N/10668), and others for an offence of terrorism, failed to disclose the information to the relevant agency as soon as practicable, and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 16(1){b) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

COUNT 9

“That you, ABDULKADIR SANI, on or about the 23% day of September,2025, in Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, indirectly retained the sum of N2,000,000.00(Two Million Naira) only in your Jaiz Bank Account Number 0005620270 from A & A Express Link Concept, which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of the proceeds of an unlawful act to wit: terrorism financing, and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18(2)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act,2022 and punishable under Section 18 (3) of the same Act.

COUNT 10

“That you, BUKAR KASHIM GONI, in September,2025, in Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, indirectly retained the aggregate sum of N50,000,000.00( Fifty Million Naira) only in your First Bank Account Number 3021511166 from A & A Express Link Concept, which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of the proceeds of an unlawful act to wit: terrorism financing, and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18(2)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act,2022 and punishable under Section 18 (3) of the same Act.

COUNT 11

“That you, ZEKERI UMORU, in September,2025, in Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, without going through a financial institution accepted a cash payment of the sum of N10,000,000.00 (Ten Million Naira) only from Colonel Mohammed Alhassan Maa‘aji and thereby committed an offence contrary to Sections 2(1)(a) and 19(1)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act,2022 and punishable under Section 19(2)(b) of the same Act.

COUNT 12

“That you, ZEKERI UMORU, in September,2025, in Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, indirectly retained the aggregate sum of N8,800,000.00(Eight Million, Eight Hundred Thousand Naira) only in your Zenith Bank Plc Account Number 2006041878, which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of the proceeds of an unlawful act to wit: terrorism financing, and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18(2)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act,2022 and punishable under Section 18 (3) of the same Act.

COUNT 13

“That you, INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM, in September, 2025, in Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, directly took possession of the sum of N1,000,000.00(One Million Naira) only from COLONEL MOHAMMED ALHASSAN MA’AJI (N/ 10668), which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of the proceeds of an unlawful act to wit: terrorism financing, and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section | (2)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act,2022 and punishable under Section 18 (3) of the same Act.

Post Views: 188
Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Reps order IG to produce fake, PFIPC agency DG Adeyemi within 48 hours

Published

8 hours ago

on

July 27, 2026

By

The House of Representatives Committee investigating the operations of the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council has directed the Inspector-General of Police, Olatunji Disu, to produce the self-acclaimed Director-General of the organisation, Adeyemi Adeniyi, before it on Wednesday.

The directive was issued on Monday during the resumed investigative hearing at the National Assembly Complex, Abuja.

Representing the IG, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Bashir Abdullahi, appeared before the committee and was instructed to ensure Adeyemi’s appearance by noon on Wednesday to assist lawmakers in their ongoing investigation into the activities of the organisation.

The committee is probing the circumstances under which the PFIPC, despite not being legally established, allegedly secured office accommodation in Phase III of the Federal Secretariat Complex in Abuja and received a budgetary allocation of ₦1.32bn in the 2026 Appropriation Act.

The directive followed the Nigeria Police Force’s confirmation of key aspects of its criminal investigation, including petitions from the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President alleging that Adeyemi fraudulently presented himself as the Director-General of both the Presidential Economic Advisory Council and the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council.

The Committee Chairman, Yusuf Gagdi, said Adeyemi’s appearance had become imperative given the seriousness of the allegations and the institutions implicated in the matter.

“This committee clearly needs the suspected DG to appear before this committee. People’s names are involved. People’s integrity are involved. Institutional names are involved. Institutional integrity is involved.

“It is not an option now. We will need him here to confirm some documents to us in such a way that will not undermine our investigation to enable us to submit our report on time,” Gagdi said.

See also  UK contractor details luxury property, unpaid bills during Diezani trial

The committee subsequently directed its clerk to formally communicate its resolution to the Inspector-General of Police.

“The committee hereby resolves that the Inspector-General of Police of the Federal Republic of Nigeria do kindly present Mr Adeyemi on Wednesday by 12 noon. That is the ruling of the committee,” Gagdi declared.

Earlier, ACP Abdullahi informed lawmakers that although investigations were ongoing, the police had already filed an eight-count charge against Adeyemi before the Federal High Court.

“The Nigerian Police Force investigated part of this case late last year and filed eight-count charges before a Federal High Court. The case is ongoing,” he said.

He disclosed that the suspect had been arrested and arraigned, but cautioned against making public disclosures that could prejudice the ongoing investigation or judicial proceedings.

“We don’t want to say things that are under investigation. It is definitely going to prejudice the ongoing investigation and make people have opinions that may prejudge the outcome of an investigation or judicial decision,” Abdullahi stated.

Despite the police’s reservations, the committee sought confirmation of documentary evidence already in its possession.

The police confirmed that on October 17, 2025, the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President petitioned security agencies over allegations against Adeyemi, prompting investigations that culminated in criminal charges bordering on conspiracy and fraud.

Investigators also confirmed receiving another petition alleging that Adeyemi falsely presented himself as the Director-General of both the Presidential Economic Advisory Council and the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council.

According to the police, the petition alleged that Adeyemi used the purported office to obtain accommodation within the Federal Secretariat, sought approval to recruit about 300 personnel, attempted to secure a $1.3 billion allocation in the 2026 Appropriation Act for the non-existent agency, and planned to organise a World Investment Summit under the platform of the purported council.

See also  Manpower shortfall may delay NSCDC’s VIP protection rollout

One of the highlights of the hearing came when the committee compared signatures on documents allegedly issued from the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President with signatures on authentic official correspondence obtained by the police.

When asked whether the signatures matched, the police witness responded unequivocally,”They are not the same.”

The committee said the discrepancy reinforced concerns that official State House documents may have been forged.

Gagdi further asked, “So, it is not only a letter that was suspected to be forged? We are dealing with documents that include what is said to be a forged Act of the National Assembly in an attempt to establish a fake agency,” he added.

Gagdi disclosed that investigators had identified about 29 allegedly forged documents, including purported approvals from the State House, the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, the Ministry of Finance and several other government institutions.

According to him, representatives of many of the affected agencies had already appeared before the committee and disowned the documents attributed to their offices.

Gagdi, however, stressed that the committee had deliberately avoided compelling the police to disclose information that could compromise ongoing criminal investigations.

“We are avoiding a situation whereby they will be pushed to make statements that will undermine their ongoing investigation,” he added.

He assured that the House investigation would continue independently and that its final report could recommend further action by relevant security agencies.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

See also  Immigration boss suspends Lagos-Seme border commanders over extortion allegations

Post Views: 18
Continue Reading

News

Forged state house letter used to create fake PFIPC agency, Acct-General reveals

Published

8 hours ago

on

July 27, 2026

By

The House of Representatives’ investigation into the operations of the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council took a dramatic turn on Monday after the Accountant-General of the Federation, Shamseldeen Ogunjimi, revealed that a forged State House letter was used to obtain official government recognition for the ‘fake’ agency.

Appearing before the House Ad Hoc Committee probing the circumstances surrounding the establishment and operations of the council, Ogunjimi disclosed that the Office of the Accountant-General acted on what appeared to be an authentic correspondence from the presidency requesting the creation of an administrative code for the PIFPC, only for investigations to later establish that the letter did not originate from the State House.

The revelation is the latest in a series of disclosures before the committee, which is investigating how a non-existent presidential agency allegedly secured office accommodation in the Federal Secretariat, sought budgetary allocations, recruited personnel and obtained official government recognition through what investigators believe were forged documents.

Presenting his report, Ogunjimi said the Office of the Accountant-General first interacted with the purported council in November 2024.

According to him, “a letter dated November 7, 2024, bearing a State House reference number, requested the creation of an administrative code for the Presidential Economic Advisory Council to facilitate budgeting, accounting and financial reporting.”

He explained that, in line with established procedures, “the Office of the Accountant-General processed the request, created the administrative code and communicated its approval to the State House,” with a copy sent to the Office of the Auditor-General for the Federation.

See also  Manpower shortfall may delay NSCDC’s VIP protection rollout

Following that approval, the office received additional requests from the purported council, including applications for self-accounting status, deployment of personnel, opening of Treasury Single Account and domiciliary accounts, as well as funding approvals.

Ogunjimi, however, stressed that although some administrative processes were carried out, no public funds were ever released to the council.

“It is important to note that no funds were released under salaries, overhead, capital, or any form of intervention or special allocation to the council,” Ogunjimi told the committee.

He further disclosed that while the council requested an establishment grant of ₦27.4bn, the application was rejected because there was no budgetary provision for such expenditure.

The Accountant-General also explained that although the Central Bank of Nigeria opened two domiciliary accounts for the organisation to receive inflows, the accounts never became operational because the council failed to satisfy the regulatory conditions required for their activation.

Lawmakers expressed concern over how the purported agency was able to navigate several layers of government bureaucracy without raising suspicion.

Responding, Ogunjimi made what committee members described as one of the most significant revelations of the hearing.

“The letter that was received by the Treasury was respectfully addressed as coming from the State House. That letter was never issued by the State House”, he said

The disclosure prompted members of the committee to conclude that a “hijacked” State House letter had allegedly been used to mislead government institutions into processing official requests for an agency that had no legal existence.

The committee also questioned how civil servants originally posted to the Office of the Chief Economic Adviser to the President eventually became attached to the purported council without the knowledge of the Office of the Accountant-General.

See also  Immigration boss suspends Lagos-Seme border commanders over extortion allegations

Ogunjimi explained that two officers deployed to the Office of the Chief Economic Adviser in 2010 and 2013 remained in the office after it was allegedly taken over by the new council, but no formal communication was sent to the treasury notifying it of any change.

“It was never assumed or written to us that those two officers were being taken over. The staff also never reported to the office to say that another council had taken over the office and the name had changed. As far as I was concerned, we were dealing with a new agency, not the Office of the Chief Economic Adviser,” he said.

He further disclosed that when the purported council later requested the deployment of five additional officers, the treasury approved only three after determining that the organisation’s size did not justify the number requested.

“It was when all this matter came to light that I got to know that two of our staff were actually working or being absorbed by the agency. We never knew. We believed, based on the records available to us, that those officers were still with the Office of the Chief Economic Adviser,” he added.

The ongoing House investigation centres on allegations that forged presidential approvals, counterfeit State House correspondence, fake Acts of the National Assembly and other falsified government documents were used to create and operate the purported Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council and the Presidential Economic Advisory Council.

The committee has already heard evidence from the Nigeria Police Force, which confirmed that criminal charges bordering on conspiracy and fraud have been filed against the prime suspect, Adeyemi Adeniyi, at the Federal High Court.

See also  Trump threatens to increase Canada tariffs over wildfire smoke pollution

At its sitting on Monday, the committee also directed the Inspector-General of Police to produce Adeyemi before lawmakers by noon on Wednesday to answer questions relating to the alleged forgery of official government documents and the operations of the purported presidential agency.

The committee is expected to conclude its investigation with recommendations on possible administrative, legislative and criminal actions against those found culpable.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

Post Views: 12
Continue Reading

News

See full list of African countries that do not need proof of funds for UK’s student visa

Published

8 hours ago

on

July 27, 2026

By

The United Kingdom on Monday updated its financial requirements for applicants seeking Student and Child Student visas, retaining stricter evidence rules while exempting nationals of only three African countries from submitting proof of funds at the point of application.

The updated guidance, published by the UK government on its website, listed Botswana, Mauritius and Tunisia as the only African countries whose nationals will not be required to provide financial evidence upfront unless requested during the visa decision-making process.

Other countries on the exemption list include Australia, Canada, China, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, the United States, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, among others.

Despite the exemption, the UK clarified that applicants from the listed countries must still meet all financial requirements and could be asked to provide evidence during the application process.

The guidance stated, “You must meet the financial requirements for this route when you apply; however, you may not need to submit evidence upfront as part of your application. In these circumstances, the decision maker may still request the evidence from you during the application process to prove you meet the financial requirements.”

The development means applicants from major African source countries for UK education, including Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, South Africa, Egypt and others not listed, will continue to submit financial documents as part of their visa applications.

Under the revised rules, applicants for a Student visa must demonstrate they have sufficient funds to cover tuition fees as stated on their Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies and living expenses.

See also  Manpower shortfall may delay NSCDC’s VIP protection rollout

Students studying outside London are required to show they have £1,171 for each month of their course, up to a maximum of nine months, while those studying in London must show £1,529 per month for the same period.

Applicants travelling with dependants must also show additional funds. Those studying outside London must have £680 per month for each dependant, while applicants studying in London must show £845 monthly for each dependant, both for up to nine months.

For Child Student visa applicants, the required maintenance funds vary depending on their living arrangements, including boarding school accommodation, foster care, residence with parents or legal guardians, or independent living for eligible 16 and 17-year-olds.

The UK government also outlined acceptable sources of funds, including government-backed student loans, official financial sponsorship, personal savings and money belonging to parents or eligible partners.

However, it said applicants cannot rely on overdrafts, cryptocurrency holdings, stocks and shares, pensions or funds kept in unregulated financial institutions.

The guidance further requires applicants using personal or family funds to show that the required amount has been held for at least 28 consecutive days before the application, with financial evidence dated no more than 31 days before submission.

The UK also maintained exemptions from providing financial evidence for certain categories of applicants, including those applying to extend their stay after spending at least 12 months in the country on a valid visa, Student Union Sabbatical Officers, doctors and dentists in training, and applicants whose nationality qualifies for the reduced documentary requirement.

The latest update comes as the UK continues to tighten oversight of its international student visa system while maintaining financial eligibility requirements for prospective students seeking to study in the country.

See also  Oil revenue shakeup: States back Tinubu’s Executive Order

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

Post Views: 19
Continue Reading

Trending