The self-acclaimed Director-General of the controversial Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC), Prince Adeyemi Matthew Adeniyi, has explained how the agency, which the Federal Government describes as fictitious, was included in the 2026 Appropriation Act. Speaking in an interview after his arrest, Adeniyi claimed he personally lobbied officials of the Budget Office to secure the agency’s inclusion in the national budget.
According to Adeniyi, he first approached the Budget Office in December 2024 to seek funding for the council in the 2025 budget. However, he said officials informed him that the appropriation process had already been concluded and advised him to return during preparations for the 2026 budget, when the proposal could be considered. He maintained that he followed the proper administrative process and denied making any illicit payments to facilitate the request.
Adeniyi also insisted that President Bola Tinubu’s Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila, played no role in the budgetary allocation. He said he never met the Chief of Staff personally and rejected allegations that the Presidency influenced the inclusion of the agency in the budget. The embattled official added that he was surprised to later discover that the PFIPC had been allocated about ₦1.3 billion in the 2026 budget despite his arrest before the appropriation process was completed.
The PFIPC has become the centre of a major controversy after the Federal Government disowned the organisation, describing it as a non-existent agency. Adeniyi is currently facing charges including forgery, impersonation and operating a fictitious government agency, allegations he has denied. The House of Representatives has also launched an investigation into how the agency was captured in the 2026 budget despite lacking legal backing.
The revelations have intensified scrutiny of Nigeria’s budget preparation process, with lawmakers and anti-corruption advocates demanding greater transparency and accountability. Investigations by security agencies and the National Assembly are expected to determine how the controversial allocation was approved and whether any public officials were involved in facilitating the inclusion of the disputed agency in the federal budget.
Post a Comment