Human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana (SAN), has called on the Federal Government to conduct a comprehensive and transparent investigation into the controversy surrounding the alleged Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC), saying the Presidency’s explanation has failed to address key concerns raised by Nigerians.
Falana made the call on Friday during an interview on Frontline, a current affairs programme on Eagle 102.5 FM, Ilese-Ijebu, Ogun State, where he argued that the issues surrounding the alleged council could not be resolved through what he described as an inadequate official statement.
According to the senior lawyer, Nigerians deserve a full account of how an organisation allegedly unknown to law appeared to function within the federal system.
“Unfortunately, I think there is more to this matter than meets the eye. Nigerians have not been given the full facts,” Falana said.
Referring to the Presidency’s response through presidential spokesman Bayo Onanuga, Falana said the controversy had exposed Nigeria to ridicule and called on the government to provide clearer explanations.
“The government must appreciate that they are dealing with civilised people, so the government must come out more clearly on this matter,” he added.
Falana questioned how the alleged council, reportedly promoted by Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew, was able to gain recognition within government structures despite not being established by any law.
He asked how the body allegedly secured inclusion in Nigeria’s Appropriation Act, operated from the Federal Secretariat, opened accounts with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), and had about 300 civil servants reportedly deployed to it by the Office of the Head of Service.
“How did an agency that is not created by law find its way into the Appropriation Act of Nigeria? How did that body get an office in the Federal Secretariat? How did that body successfully open accounts in the Central Bank of Nigeria? How did the Head of Service post about 300 staff to that office?” he queried.
The senior advocate argued that the controversy extends beyond the criminal allegations against the suspected promoter of the council, insisting that several government institutions should explain their roles in the matter.
He said the National Assembly also has questions to answer if the alleged agency was indeed captured in the national budget.
“You cannot have an agency that is not created by law in the budget of a country. You cannot put an agency that is unknown to law in the Appropriation Act. The National Assembly members will have to explain who authorised them to insert the body into the budget,” Falana said.
Citing Section 81 of the Constitution, he noted that appropriation bills originate from the Executive before being transmitted to the legislature, making it necessary for the government to explain how the alleged council appeared in the budget.
Falana described the Presidency’s explanation as containing “gaping holes”, arguing that the official account does not adequately explain the alleged activities of the organisation.
“If this is a conman that can con the Presidency into issuing a letter of appointment, con the Central Bank into opening accounts, con the National Assembly into inserting the agency into the budget, I think the government is kidding,” he stated.
He also called for an independent investigation into the alleged involvement of the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, recommending that he temporarily step aside to ensure a credible inquiry.
“The government has a duty to ask Mr. Gbajabiamila to step aside to allow for a full investigation in the interest of the country and even in his own interest,” Falana said.
While supporting the ongoing prosecution of the alleged promoter of the council, Falana maintained that the criminal trial would not answer broader institutional questions surrounding the matter.
“The law must be allowed to take its course. But there are issues that are not going to come up in court. The court is not going to tell us who opened an account in the Central Bank. The court is not going to tell us who inserted the agency into the budget or why it was signed by the President,” he said.
He urged the Federal Government to reopen its inquiry, involve all relevant institutions, and issue a more detailed public explanation to reassure Nigerians that there was no attempt to conceal the facts.
“The government will have to revisit the matter, go back to the drawing board and issue another statement that will be acceptable to Nigerians by assuring them that there is no cover-up in this matter,” he added.
Falana warned that restoring public confidence in government institutions would require openness, accountability and a thorough investigation into every aspect of the controversy.
The controversy began on June 11, 2026, when the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President issued a public disclaimer denying the existence of the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) and distancing the Presidency from its alleged Director-General, Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew.
The Presidency said no such council exists under the administration of President Bola Tinubu and described Adeyemi as an impostor who falsely claimed to have been appointed by the Office of the Chief of Staff.
It subsequently disclosed that the Chief of Staff had petitioned security agencies in October 2025 after reports that the purported council was operating from the Federal Secretariat, allegedly issuing forged appointment letters and presenting itself as a federal agency.
Police later arrested Adeyemi and charged him alongside two others before the Federal High Court on allegations of forgery, impersonation and obtaining by false pretence.
