A widening investigation into the alleged fraud surrounding the disowned Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) has identified a growing list of senior government officials and key federal agencies whose actions, approvals, or correspondence are now under scrutiny.
According to documents and findings reported by Premium Times, the alleged operations of PFIPC — fronted by its disowned Director-General, Adeniyi Adeyemi — reportedly passed through multiple layers of Nigeria’s civil service system, raising questions about verification lapses across institutions.
PRESIDENCY AND TOP GOVERNMENT OFFICES
However, several high-level offices within the Presidency have been linked to correspondence and administrative actions connected to the disputed agency:
- Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (OSGF)
- Office of the Chief of Staff to the President
- Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA)
- Ministry of Foreign Affairs
- Nigerian Police Force (NPF)
Documents reviewed indicate that these offices either responded to PFIPC-related requests or were involved in communications that gave the disputed agency operational visibility before its legitimacy was publicly challenged.
The Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, reportedly wrote to security agencies and ministries to disclaim PFIPC and its alleged operator, describing the appointment letter tied to the agency as forged. However, investigators say key verification steps — including forensic interrogation of signatures — were not completed at the time of early inquiries.
KEY CIVIL SERVANTS AND OFFICIALS NAMED IN DOCUMENTS
Additionally, a number of senior civil servants have also been directly linked to PFIPC-related approvals and correspondence:
- Nnamdi Mbaeri — then Permanent Secretary, General Services Office (OSGF)
Allegedly signed a letter requesting office space for PFIPC at the Federal Secretariat via EFCC-linked properties. - Nadungu Gagare — Permanent Secretary, Political and Economic Affairs Office (OSGF)
Reportedly sent an official invitation to PFIPC leadership for participation in a Nigerian delegation to an international fintech summit in Canada. - Mulikat Sanni — Director, Treasury Inspectorate, Office of the Accountant General of the Federation (OAGF)
Approved provisional self-accounting status for PFIPC. - Dauda Abdulhamid — Director of Administration, OAGF
Signed postings that included deployment of civil servants to PFIPC. - Hamisu Abdullahi — Director, Banking Services Department, Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN)
Signed correspondence confirming the creation of domiciliary accounts linked to PFIPC.
AGENCIES INVOLVED IN PFIPC-RELATED PROCESSES
Meanwhile, the investigation also identifies several federal institutions whose systems or processes were allegedly used in the disputed approvals:
- Office of the Accountant General of the Federation (OAGF)
- Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN)
- Budget Office of the Federation
- Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC)
- Nigeria Internet Registration Association (NiRA) / NITDA digital domain system
- Nigerian Civil Service Commission structures linked to postings and deployments
Also, of particular concern is the alleged allocation of a budget code and inclusion of PFIPC in the 2026 federal budget, despite questions over its legal existence.
THE POLICE AND INVESTIGATIVE BODIES
Meanwhile, the Nigeria Police Force has also come under scrutiny for its handling of the case. Although investigations reportedly began and concluded in 2025, questions remain over the pace of prosecution and whether all relevant officials have been formally interrogated.
Did You Miss? Bandits Kill Nine Farmers, Abduct Others in Fresh Kaduna Attack
However, a police investigation report cited in the findings suggests that some key individuals linked to approvals and correspondence had not been interviewed or subjected to forensic verification at the time of reporting.
THE CENTRAL QUESTION
Despite multiple official denials and internal disclaimers, the PFIPC matter continues to raise a critical institutional question: How did a disputed federal agency move through multiple layers of government — from budget processes to banking systems — without early detection?
For now, the list of officials and agencies linked to the controversy continues to grow as investigations deepen, with no final judicial determination yet made on the full extent of responsibility.