SGF documents show ‘fake agency’ existed despite FG’s denial

Fresh official documents have raised questions over the presidency’s insistence that the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC) never existed, revealing that the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF) formally received and processed correspondence submitted in the council’s name months before it was publicly declared fictitious.

New documents have emerged showing that the SGF’s office acknowledged a request from Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi, who presented himself as director-general of the PFIPC, seeking office accommodation from recovered federal government properties managed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

The records indicate that the SGF received the request on November 12, 2024, and subsequently forwarded it to the anti-graft agency on November 21, 2024, for what the office described as “further necessary action”.

The documentary trail has emerged as Adeyemi faces prosecution on allegations of forging presidential documents, impersonating a public official and operating what the presidency has described as a fictitious government agency.

The documents are likely to intensify scrutiny over how an organisation now described as non-existent was able to correspond with federal institutions and have its requests processed through official government channels.

A forwarding letter signed by Nnamdi Maurice Mbaeri, permanent secretary, general services office, on behalf of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, listed three government institutions requesting office accommodation from recovered federal assets.

One of the applications was identified as a request from the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council under reference number SH/DG/PFIPC/RQ/107, dated November 7, 2024.

“I am directed to forward the attached copies of letters requesting allocation of office accommodation from the recovered federal government-landed properties for further necessary action,” the SGF’s office wrote to the EFCC.

Attached to the correspondence was Adeyemi’s request, in which he portrayed the PFIPC as a federal investment promotion agency responsible for attracting foreign direct investment into Nigeria and coordinating investment-related activities across ministries, departments and agencies.

In the letter, Adeyemi described the council as “the resource and coordinating centre for the nation’s foreign investment promotion activities” and “a one-stop-shop for investments” responsible for promoting Nigeria as a preferred destination for investors.

He further claimed that the organisation served as a repository for investment information, coordinated government support for prospective investors and worked with public institutions to improve the country’s investment climate.

According to him, the council’s vision was to make Nigeria “the world’s preferred investment destination” by facilitating private sector investments capable of creating jobs and promoting economic prosperity.

Those representations stand in sharp contrast to the presidency’s position that the council had no legal existence.

In a statement issued this week, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, described the PFIPC as a fictitious organisation, insisting that Adeyemi had fraudulently created the body and forged documents to give it legitimacy.

The Presidency said investigations by security agencies found that Adeyemi forged an appointment letter purportedly signed by the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, and falsely presented himself as the director general of the council.

Court filings show that the federal government has filed an eight-count charge against Adeyemi and two other suspects currently at large over allegations bordering on conspiracy, forgery, impersonation and related offences.

Among witnesses listed by the prosecution is the chief of staff to the president, Femi Gbajabiamila, alongside officials from the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation and other government institutions.

The prosecution alleges that between 2024 and 2025, the defendants established a fictitious federal agency and used forged presidential documents bearing official insignia, reference numbers and seals to project legitimacy.

One of the charges accuses Adeyemi of forging an appointment letter purportedly issued by President Bola Tinubu and signed by Gbajabiamila.

Another alleges that he falsely represented himself as director-general of the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council.

An interim investigation report prepared by the Inspector-General of Police Monitoring Unit stated that the case originated from a petition submitted by the Office of the Chief of Staff after concerns emerged over forged appointment letters purportedly emanating from the presidency.

Investigators alleged that the forged documents carried falsified signatures, reference numbers and official seals and were used to create leadership positions in entities that had no legal existence, particularly the PFIPC.

The report further alleged that Adeyemi held meetings with both local and foreign stakeholders while presenting himself as head of the council and also wrote to several government institutions in that capacity.

According to investigators, he sought diplomatic support from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, requesting a Note Verbale to the United States Embassy to facilitate visas for individuals he described as staff of the council.

Police said searches conducted after Adeyemi’s arrest recovered alleged forged appointment letters, official letterheads, correspondence addressed to ministries and agencies, and documents bearing presidential insignia.

The documentary evidence, however, raises broader governance questions beyond the criminal allegations now before the court.

While the presidency maintains that the PFIPC never existed, the SGF correspondence indicates that requests submitted in the council’s name were formally acknowledged and transmitted within government.

The documents do not establish that the council was legally created or officially recognised. They do, however, suggest that correspondence bearing its identity passed through official administrative processes without immediate challenge, highlighting potential gaps in institutional verification and internal controls.

The development has fuelled calls for a broader investigation into whether officials within government inadvertently—or otherwise—facilitated the activities attributed to the alleged agency.

Human rights lawyer Femi Falana has urged the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission to conduct an independent investigation into the controversy, including allegations surrounding the operations of the purported council.

Meanwhile, efforts to obtain official clarification from the SGF’s office yielded no substantive response.

Yomi Odunuga, special adviser on Media to the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, requested copies of the correspondence when contacted, saying the office would comment after reviewing the documents.

Repeated telephone calls and a text message sent to EFCC spokesperson Dele Oyewale were not returned as of press time.

With criminal proceedings now underway, the court is expected to determine the authenticity of the documents allegedly used by Adeyemi.

Beyond the legal contest, however, the emergence of official correspondence processed through the SGF’s office is likely to deepen public scrutiny of administrative safeguards within government institutions and the ease with which unauthorised entities may have gained access to official channels.