Connect with us

News

Fake Agency Scandal: Gbajabiamila threatens Adeyemi with N10bn defamation suit

Published

on

Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, ha threatened to initiate legal steps against Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi, and demand N10 billion in damages over allegations linking him to murder, bribery and other criminal activities.

The move was conveyed in a letter dated July 6, 2026, signed by Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Kemi Pinheiro, on behalf of Pinheiro LP, the Chief of Staff’s legal representatives.

The dispute stems from a press conference held by Adeyemi on June 25, during which he accused Gbajabiamila of seeking a share of the alleged take-off funds of the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC), receiving money through intermediaries, abusing his office and participating in efforts to conceal wrongdoing.Death & Tragedy

During the briefing, Adeyemi also referred to the Chief of Staff as “a murderer” and “an assassin”.

The Presidency has consistently maintained that the PFIPC is a fictitious organisation, despite its appearance in the 2026 Appropriation Act.

Gbajabiamila’s lawyers dismissed all the allegations as entirely false and defamatory, saying they were intended to damage his reputation.

The letter stated: “not only false but gravely defamatory,” adding that the allegations were “designed to portray our client as corrupt, dishonest, criminally culpable, morally bankrupt, administratively incompetent, a murderer and unfit to occupy public office.”

According to the legal team, Adeyemi is already standing trial before the Federal High Court in Abuja in Charge No. FHC/ABJ/CR/652/2026, FRN v. Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew & Ors, over allegations including forgery of an appointment letter bearing Gbajabiamila’s purported signature and the alleged counterfeiting of Presidential letter-headed papers to present himself as a government official.Nigeria Investment Guide

See also  Police yet to receive court order on tinted-glass permits – FPRO

The lawyers further rejected Adeyemi’s claims that Gbajabiamila demanded 48 per cent of a purported N27.4 billion take-off grant for the council, amounting to about N12.5 billion, or that he received N400 million through proxies connected to appointments within the organisation.

Other allegations dismissed in the letter included claims that the Chief of Staff intimidated individuals and media organisations, manipulated budget processes, attempted to misuse security agencies and performed official duties while under the influence of intoxicating substances.Trending News Feed

Gbajabiamila also denied ever having any relationship with Adeyemi.

“You have never at any time met, interacted with, communicated with, or had any form of personal or official dealing whatsoever with him,” the lawyers wrote, adding that the decision to “fabricate and publish allegations against a person with whom you have had absolutely no relationship or interaction underscores the reckless, baseless and malicious nature of your publication.”

The legal team also criticised the timing of the allegations, noting that they were made after criminal proceedings had already been instituted against Adeyemi.

“It is even more disturbing to our client that you resorted to defaming him through your press statements after a criminal Charge had been filed against you,” the letter stated.

It added, “Trial by media remains unknown to Nigerian law and cannot be a substitute for due process.”Nigeria Investment Guide

Gbajabiamila’s lawyers demanded that Adeyemi immediately stop making further defamatory statements, remove all related videos, recordings and transcripts from every platform, issue a full retraction and apology in at least five national newspapers and across all social media platforms used to circulate the claims, and provide a written undertaking that he would refrain from making further allegations.

See also  Nigeria, Britain set for fresh security alliance

The letter warned that failure to comply would result in both criminal defamation proceedings under the laws of the Federal Capital Territory and a civil lawsuit seeking N10 billion in aggravated and exemplary damages. The damages, it said, would be donated to a charity chosen by Gbajabiamila. The legal action would also seek a perpetual injunction and a court order compelling the publication of an apology.

The controversy centres on the PFIPC, which was listed in the 2026 Appropriation Act under the title Presidential Economic Advisory Council/Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council and received more than N1.3 billion in budgetary allocations, including about N803 million for personnel, N200 million for overhead and N300 million for capital expenditure.

Adeyemi had argued during his June 25 press conference that an agency included in a budget signed by the President could not be regarded as non-existent.

However, the Presidency insists the council is fraudulent and has no legal existence.

Meanwhile, human rights lawyer Femi Falana has argued that the Presidency lacks the constitutional authority to clear anyone involved in the dispute and has called for an independent investigation into the allegations against both Gbajabiamila and Adeyemi.

Adeyemi is scheduled to appear before the Federal High Court on July 27, 2026.

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

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

on

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  Nigeria, Britain set for fresh security alliance

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  FG tightens border control due to fresh Ebola Outbreak

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  Oyo protests go nationwide, NASS moves on state police in reaction to school children abduction

Continue Reading

News

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

Published

on

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  Boko Haram members found on army, police recruitment lists – Wase

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  Sacking Of Service Chiefs: ‘This Is Not A Reaction To Any Rumour Of Coups’ – Presidency Clarifies

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  Court adjourns Natasha’s cybercrime trial till Oct 20

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

Continue Reading

News

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

Published

on

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  3,345 BVAS deployed, movement restricted ahead of FCT poll

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  Wike sues FCT workers over indefinite strike

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

Continue Reading

Trending