The House of Representatives committee probing the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC) failed to hold its scheduled investigative hearing on Wednesday, August 12, leaving the next step in the inquiry uncertain.
The 12-member Ad Hoc Committee, headed by Rep. Yusuf Gagdi, had fixed Wednesday for the continuation of its proceedings after its previous sitting was adjourned. Government agencies and other stakeholders were expected to appear before the panel.
However, the committee did not convene as planned, and no official reason was given for the cancellation as of the time of filing this report.
Neither the committee nor Gagdi had announced whether a fresh date had been set for the hearing.
The development comes as the investigation appears to be approaching the final phase of its public hearings, after which the lawmakers are expected to compile their findings and recommendations.
How the PFIPC controversy began
The investigation followed questions surrounding the PFIPC, which allegedly operated as a Federal Government agency despite claims that it had not been created through legislation, an executive order or any other valid government instrument.
The controversy intensified after the organisation appeared in the 2026 Appropriation Act with an allocation of about N1.3 billion.
The House subsequently established the ad hoc committee to determine how the purported agency was included in the national budget and operated within government structures.
During the probe, allegations have emerged concerning forged government documents, the acquisition of office accommodation, the use of government vehicle number plates and efforts to secure recognition from Ministries, Departments and Agencies.
Documents allegedly forged
One of the significant developments in the inquiry was the discovery of documents allegedly connected to several government institutions.
The Accountant-General of the Federation, Shamseldeen Ogunjimi, told the lawmakers that his office processed a budget code for the purported council after receiving a letter said to have originated from the State House.
He later told the committee that the Presidency did not issue the correspondence.
“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,” Ogunjimi said.
Following the testimony, the committee said it had identified about 29 official documents it believed were forged.
The documents were reportedly linked to 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 and the Federal Ministry of Finance.
The Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Didi Esther Walson-Jack, also acknowledged before the committee that adequate due diligence had not been carried out in processing documents associated with the purported council.
Gagdi later declared the alleged appointment letter of Adeniyi Adeyemi, who presented himself as the PFIPC Director-General, to be fake.
Committee yet to question Adeyemi
Adeyemi’s failure to appear publicly before the lawmakers has remained another unresolved aspect of the investigation.
The committee had directed the Inspector-General of Police to produce him within 48 hours, stressing that his testimony was important to clarifying outstanding issues surrounding the organisation and documents allegedly attributed to it.
The police, however, told the committee that Adeyemi was in custody under a court order and could not be released to appear before the lawmakers without the necessary judicial approval.
The committee subsequently decided to question him at an undisclosed location and time in order not to disrupt criminal investigations being conducted by security and anti-corruption agencies.
Adeyemi’s lawyers have challenged the arrangement, arguing that their client should be given an opportunity to publicly answer the allegations, particularly since other individuals connected to the matter had appeared before the committee.
Presidency disowns PFIPC
The Presidency has also distanced itself from the purported council, denying that it authorised its establishment or requested a budget code for the organisation.
The Director of Administration in the State House, Abdulkadir Idris, told the committee that the Presidency did not create the PFIPC and had not written to the Accountant-General of the Federation seeking a budget code for it.
“We did not send any correspondence or request to the Office of the Accountant-General in respect of this council. We don’t even know anything about this council. We only heard about it when it started appearing in the news,” he said.
READ ALSO: ICPC Uncovers Two More Fake Agencies Linked To Alleged PFIPC DG
The State House also rejected a purported document allegedly signed by an individual identified as “Akande Adewale” as Director of Administration and Support Services, stating that neither the official nor the department existed in the Presidency.
ICPC submits interim report
The committee’s latest development followed the submission of interim findings by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).
The commission said its investigation found that Adeyemi was neither appointed by the Federal Government nor by any authorised government institution.
It also concluded that the PFIPC was not created by legislation, executive order or another valid government instrument.
According to the ICPC, Adeyemi allegedly relied on forged appointment letters and other documents, while the purported council had taken on the identity, office and operational structures of the former Presidential Economic Advisory Council.
The commission, however, said its investigation found no evidence that Federal Government funds had actually been released or paid to the purported agency.
It identified shortcomings in verification procedures within some government institutions and recommended Adeyemi’s prosecution, administrative action against officials whose negligence allegedly enabled the scheme and reforms aimed at strengthening verification systems and internal controls.
Probe faces fresh uncertainty
With the committee failing to sit on its scheduled date, attention is now focused on when the lawmakers will reconvene and whether the remaining issues will be resolved before the investigation concludes.
Beyond determining how the purported PFIPC was created and operated, the probe is also seeking to establish how it allegedly gained access to government facilities, appeared in the national budget and engaged with public institutions without being detected earlier.
The unanswered questions therefore extend beyond the allegations against Adeyemi to the institutional gaps that may have allowed the purported organisation to function within government structures.
The committee’s next sitting will also be closely watched as lawmakers prepare their eventual findings and recommendations against the backdrop of the ICPC’s interim conclusions.