The House committee probing the controversial PFIPC says it investigated all individuals connected to the matter, including Femi Gbajabiamila and Adeniyi Adeyemi, stressing that its findings were guided by evidence rather than the identities of those involved.
A combo of Gbajabiamila and Adeyemi
The Chairman of the House of Representatives Ad Hoc Committee investigating the alleged inclusion of the purported Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) in the Federal Government’s budget, Yusuf Gagdi, has dismissed claims that the panel focused its investigation on the organisation’s self-acclaimed Director-General, Adeniyi Adeyemi, while ignoring Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila.
Gagdi said the committee investigated everyone connected to the controversy and insisted that its probe was guided by evidence rather than the identities of those involved.
Speaking on Channels Television’s Politics Today on Wednesday, the lawmaker was responding to suggestions that the committee’s investigation had concentrated on Adeyemi, who claimed that Gbajabiamila issued him a letter appointing him as Director-General of the purported agency.
“You cannot say that we investigated Adeyemi but did not investigate Gbajabiamila, we investigated everybody,” Gagdi said.
He explained that the committee did not invite either Adeyemi or Gbajabiamila to appear before it during its public hearings because the central focus of the House resolution was not specifically about either individual.
According to him, the committee’s mandate was to establish how the purported agency found its way into the machinery of government and the Federal Budget Framework.
He said any invitation issued by the committee had to be based on evidence gathered during the investigation, adding that where such evidence did not warrant an invitation, the committee had no reason to summon the person involved.
We Met Adeyemi In Police Custody
Although neither of the two central figures appeared before the committee during its public hearings, Gagdi disclosed that members of the panel met Adeyemi while he was in police custody.
He said the committee received three petitions from members of the public concerning the matter, all of which were against Adeyemi and none of which was against Gbajabiamila.
According to Gagdi, one of the petitioners accused Adeyemi of defrauding him of ₦400 million.
He said the allegation was the reason the committee visited Adeyemi in police custody, explaining that members needed to establish whether the claim was genuine.
“There was a petition against him that he collected ₦400 million from someone, so we needed to establish whether that was true or not,” Gagdi said.
Committee Says No Evidence Against Gbajabiamila
Earlier on Wednesday, the committee presented its preliminary findings on the investigation at a press briefing in Abuja.
The committee was constituted by the House following controversy over the inclusion of the PFIPC in the 2026 Appropriation Bill despite questions surrounding its existence and legal status.
In its preliminary report, the committee said it found no evidence that Gbajabiamila authorised, established or participated in the activities of the purported organisation.
Rather, the panel said evidence before it showed that the Chief of Staff took steps to alert security and investigative agencies and initiate administrative verification after concerns about the organisation were brought to his attention.
The committee also said it found no evidence that Gbajabiamila signed the purported appointment letter presented as evidence that Adeyemi had been appointed Director-General of the PFIPC.
The panel said the document was not issued or signed by the Chief of Staff and was falsely attributed to the Presidency.
The committee consequently commended Gbajabiamila for what it described as timely security and administrative interventions after concerns about the purported organisation were brought to his attention.
