PFIPC Scandal: Dalung Names Top Government Officials To Be Held Responsible

Former Minister of Youth and Sports Development, Solomon Dalung, has listed government officials who should be held responsible for the “Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC)” scandal.

He listed President Bola Tinubu, the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), George Akume, and the National Security Adviser (NSA), Nuhu Ribadu, as culpable.

Naija News reports that the Presidency on Wednesday dismissed renewed claims by Adeyemi Adeniyi Matthew that he was appointed to head a presidential agency, insisting he is an impostor who allegedly forged official documents to present himself as Director-General of a non-existent PFIPC, also described as the Presidential Economic Advisory Council.

Sharing his thoughts on the matter during an interview on Channels Television on Friday, Dalung claimed the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, is the “prime suspect” in the controversy, insisting that anyone who overlooks his role is complicit in what he termed an embarrassing episode for Nigeria.

Dalung also insisted that the Director-General of the Department of State Services (DSS), the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), and the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) should also be probed.

“Those that Nigeria should hold accountable: number one, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu; number two, the Chief of Staff; number three, the Secretary to the Government of the Federation; number four, the National Security Adviser; number five, the Director-General of the DSS; number six, the Chairman of the EFCC; and number seven, the Central Bank Governor.

“These people, in my view, played roles in embarrassing Nigeria,” Dalung said

He also argued that no credible investigation into the alleged activities of businessman Adeniyi at the Presidential Villa can succeed without first scrutinising the office of the President’s top aide.

“Anybody who is not looking at the Chief of Staff to the President as a prime suspect is complicit in the entire transaction and needs to be investigated,” Dalung said.

According to Dalung, the Chief of Staff occupies a critical position within the Presidency, making it impossible for anyone to gain access to the Presidential Villa without the necessary authorisation.

“The Chief of Staff, who is the ear and the eyes of the President, the gatekeeper, and the first contact point with the office of the President, should, by this time, have been suspended before any other investigation because they are not going to make any headway without him,” he said.

Questioning how Adeniyi allegedly gained entry into the Villa, Dalung maintained that access to the seat of government is tightly regulated through a structured security protocol.

“Adeniyi did not access the Villa except when somebody granted him a pass. The Villa is not Zone 4 or a marketplace. Even if you have an appointment in the Villa, you must be accredited with a pass to gain entry, and the designated area of your visit must be captured within the security network of the Villa,” he said.

He argued that Gbajabiamila must account for whether the President was misled, whether critical information was deliberately withheld, or whether the situation resulted from what he described as “a personal and selfish agenda”.

“The Chief of Staff to the President is the number one suspect because he is responsible for either misleading the President, deliberately failing to provide the relevant information because of his vested interest in the matter, or creating this embarrassing situation in pursuit of a personal and selfish agenda,” the former minister said.

Dalung alleged that the controversy reflects a broader pattern of irregularities within the office of the Chief of Staff, citing the earlier controversy involving former Humanitarian Affairs Minister Betta Edu as an example.

He said: “The Betta Edu scandal also originated from his office. His office was involved in coordinating the approval of consultancy contracts… violating laid-down procedures.”