House of Reps to probe N1.3bn budget allocation to non-existent agency

…to summon budget minister

The House of Representatives on Wednesday resolved to investigate the allocation of more than N1.3 billion to the non-existent Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) in the 2026 Appropriation Act, noting that the development exposes serious flaws in Nigeria’s budget process and raises concerns about the integrity of public financial management.

The resolution followed the adoption of a motion of urgent public importance moved by Yusuf Gagdi, who represents Pankshin/Kanke/Kanam Federal Constituency of Plateau State.

Leading the debate, Gagdi said the budgetary allocation to the so-called PFIPC, an agency not established by any law or executive instrument, pointed to glaring weaknesses in the country’s appropriation system and suggested that similar fictitious entities could have found their way into previous budgets undetected.

He said the proposed investigation would determine how the alleged agency secured a place in the 2026 budget despite lacking any legal basis for its existence.

According to the lawmaker, the organisation had operated from the Federal Secretariat Complex in Abuja, engaged with several government institutions, and projected itself as a legitimate government body until the federal government publicly disowned it.

Gagdi noted that while the activities of the organisation are already the subject of criminal proceedings before the Federal High Court in Abuja, the House inquiry would focus specifically on the budgetary process and the institutional failures that enabled the agency to gain official recognition.

He told lawmakers that the organisation relied on a document claiming it was established under “Chapter N2117 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria”. However, he said records available to the National Assembly showed that no such law establishing the council had ever been enacted.

According to him, the closest legislation is the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission (NIPC) Act, making the legal instrument cited by the organisation “manifestly false” when compared with official statutory records.

Gagdi expressed concern that over N1.3 billion was captured for the council in the 2026 budget framework, questioning how an agency with no legal foundation passed through both executive and legislative budget scrutiny.

“The ease with which a single unestablished entity processed through official channels suggests a systemic vulnerability rather than an isolated administrative lapse,” he said.

Following the debate, the House resolved to set up an ad hoc committee to investigate how the budget provision was inserted into the 2026 Appropriation Framework, tracing its journey from the executive proposal through legislative consideration.

Lawmakers also resolved to invite the Minister of Budget and Economic Planning and the Director-General of the Budget Office of the Federation to explain the verification procedures used before new agencies are admitted into the federal budget.

The House further directed that all ministries, departments, agencies and government bodies listed in the 2025 and 2026 appropriation frameworks be verified against their enabling laws to confirm their legal status.

It also requested the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation to confirm that no public funds have been released and that no payment warrants would be issued in favour of the alleged agency pending the outcome of the investigation.

To prevent a recurrence, the House mandated the Budget Office to submit, alongside every appropriation bill, a certified list of all agencies proposed for funding, indicating the enabling law establishing each institution.

Gagdi anchored the resolutions on Sections 80, 81, 88 and 89 of the Constitution, as well as Sections 19, 30 and 50 of the Fiscal Responsibility Act, 2007.

Supporting the motion, Benjamin Kalu, deputy speaker, recounted how he nearly engaged with the organisation after receiving an official-looking letter bearing the Presidency’s insignia.

Kalu said his office received correspondence dated May 2, 2025, from a body identifying itself as both the Presidential Economic Advisory Council (PEAC) and the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council.

According to him, the letter contained a Federal Secretariat address, an official-looking government logo and a “.gov.ng” website, prompting his office to verify the organisation’s physical address before granting its representatives an audience.

He said officials confirmed that the organisation operated from the stated office. However, when its representatives eventually met him, they abandoned the policy issues contained in their letter and appeared more interested in taking photographs.

“This shows that having the presidency on a letterhead is no longer sufficient proof that an agency is genuine,” Kalu said, adding that the House must establish how the organisation secured office space within the Federal Secretariat and gained access to senior government officials.