“No funds were approved or disbursed for the fake PFIPC/PEAC, and there were no weaknesses in the State House or Central Bank of Nigeria systems” – ICPC Chair
The discovery of two additional fake government agencies linked to Adeniyi Matthew Adeyemi has deepened one of Nigeria’s most audacious impersonation and fraud scandals—while investigators firmly rule out any complicity by the State House.
The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) revealed that Adeyemi, who falsely presented himself as Director-General of the so-called Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC), operated within a broader web of fictitious institutions designed to project legitimacy and facilitate illicit financial activities.
ICPC Chairman, Dr. Musa Adamu Aliyu, disclosed these findings on Thursday while briefing State House correspondents after presenting an interim report to President Bola Tinubu at the Presidential Villa, Abuja.
At the heart of the investigation is the confirmation that neither Adeyemi nor the PFIPC had any legal standing. The commission established that the organisation was never created by an Act of the National Assembly or by executive order, and that the appointment letter used by Adeyemi was forged.
More revealing, however, is the uncovering of two additional phantom entities—the FCT Investment Promotion Agency and the Foreign Investment Promotion Agency. According to the ICPC, these agencies were fabricated using forged legislative instruments and subsequently used to open bank accounts for illegal transactions, indicating a deliberate and structured attempt to institutionalise fraud.
Investigators further found that Adeyemi’s operation extended beyond mere impersonation. The syndicate reportedly took over offices and official instruments previously used by the defunct Presidential Economic Advisory Council (PEAC), leveraging the credibility of a legitimate but dissolved institution to reinforce its deception. From this base, the group engaged in impersonation, false representation, and other unlawful activities, exploiting gaps in inter-agency verification systems.
In a calculated move to expand the scope of the scheme, Adeyemi was said to have altered the name of the fake body from the Foreign Investment Promotion Council to the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council—an apparent attempt to broaden its mandate and create avenues for revenue generation under a more authoritative-sounding identity.
Despite the scale and sophistication of the operation, the ICPC was emphatic in exonerating key government institutions. “No funds were approved or disbursed for the fake PFIPC/PEAC, and there were no weaknesses in the State House or Central Bank of Nigeria systems,” Aliyu stated, effectively dismissing concerns about systemic compromise at the highest levels of government.
However, the investigation did identify internal lapses at other institutional levels. Officials from the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (OSGF), the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation, the Budget Office of the Federation, and the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA) were cited as collaborators, raising critical questions about accountability and internal controls across government agencies.
The commission has recommended the prosecution of Adeyemi, disciplinary measures against implicated public officials, and sweeping reforms to strengthen verification processes and institutional safeguards.
Aliyu stressed that the findings remain preliminary. “The report is interim and the investigation continues to uncover more details to file criminal charges against Adeyemi and his collaborators,” he said.
President Tinubu has been briefed on the developments and has reaffirmed his administration’s commitment to transparency and accountability, as authorities continue to unravel the full extent of the scheme.
What emerges from the unfolding investigation is not just a case of individual fraud, but a systemic stress test—one that exposes how institutional gaps can be exploited to manufacture legitimacy, and how critical reforms must now follow to prevent a recurrence.
