PFIPC Scandal Deepens As ICPC Uncovers More Fake Agencies

The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) has uncovered two more agencies created allegedly created by the detained Director-General of the illegal Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC), Adeniyi Adeyemi, using forged government documents.

According to findings contained in the ICPC’s interim report, Adeyemi allegedly created the FCT Investment Promotion Agency (FIPA) and the Foreign Investment Promotion Agency and Public-Private Partnership (FIPA-PPP), presenting both as government institutions.

The ICPC stated that Adeyemi subsequently used the documents purportedly establishing the organisation to facilitate the opening of commercial bank accounts in their name.

Premium Times reports that the findings form part of an investigation orders by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu into the activities of the PFIPC.

In the interim report submitted to Tinubu, the ICPC concluded that Adeyemi was never appointed by the federal government and that the PFIPC was not established through legislation, and executive order or by any other valid government instrument.

The ICPC recommended Adeyemi’s prosecution for alleged impersonation, forgery, criminal misrepresentation and related offences.

Adeyemi and other defendants have been charged by the police over allegations arising from the controversy.

Adeyemi forged legislative instruments titled the Foreign Investment Promotion Agency and Public-Private Partnership Act (FIPA-PPP), Chapter N2117, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, and the FCT Investment Promotion Agency Act.

The commission said the two documents were variants of the same forged legislation previously used in relation to the Presidential Economic Advisory Council (PEAC) and PFIPC. The PEAC was established by former President Muhammadu Buhari to advise him on economic matters but has ceased to exist since he left office. Mr Adeyemi is believed to have used the name of the council to further his nefarious activities.

Adeyemi used the forged documents presenting the two organisations as federal government agencies to open bank accounts in their names.

The Commission uncovered that the account-opening documents reviewed by investigators did not contain the mandatory authorisation of the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation (OAGF), which is required for ministries, departments and agencies to operate accounts in commercial banks.

The instructions to open the accounts were purportedly issued by a person referred to as the chairman of the PEAC, Adekunle Ajayi, and a supposed secretary, identified in the documents as Lovina Akabueze.

Adeyemi was designated as Director-General and Chief Executive Officer and listed as the sole signatory to the accounts, the investigation found.

The ICPC recommended that the managing director, chief compliance officer and relationship or account officer responsible for the Unity Bank accounts be invited and interviewed, alongside relevant OAGF officials, Mr Ajayi, and Ms Akabueze.

It also recommended a broader analysis of bank accounts linked to Mr Adeyemi and other sources of funds he claimed to have obtained as loans.

Adeyemi expanded his reach beyond PFIPC
The creation of the two fictitious agencies came amid Mr Adeyemi’s broader efforts to make PFIPC appear to be an established government institution.

The ICPC said he wrote to several government agencies seeking collaboration and attempting to assume functions that fell within the mandates of existing institutions.

Among other things, he sought involvement in the Federal Executive Council, collection of stamp duties and excess bank charges, processing of visas for foreign investors, collection of import duties, maritime revenue and temporary import permits.

The commission said those requests encroached on the functions of the Nigerian Investment Promotion Council (NIPC), the Nigeria Immigration Service (NIS), the Nigeria Revenue Service (NRS) and the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA).

Adeyemi also attempted to organise a World Investment Summit.

As part of that effort, he hosted members of the diplomatic community accredited to Nigeria and international investors at the Wells Carlton Hotel and Apartment in Abuja on 10 October 2025 for a pre-summit dinner.

The event was organised without formal coordination with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, according to the ICPC.

The event later became one of the developments that raised questions about PFIPC.

On 16 October 2025, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs wrote to the Chief of Staff to the President and the National Security Adviser seeking clarification about Adeyemi’s status following his engagement with members of the diplomatic community.

Checks by the Office of the National Security Adviser revealed that the PFIPC was not a federal government entity and that Adeyemi was an impostor who had never been appointed by the government.

Also the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, petitioned law enforcement agencies, setting in motion the investigation that disrupted Adeyemi’s activities.

The police later charged him and two other defendants with offences including conspiracy, forgery and impersonation.

However, the disruption of the PFIPC did not immediately end Adeyemi’s effort to organise the proposed event.

According to the ICPC, he subsequently operated under another organisation called “World Investment Summit Group” and opened an account with Moore Money Microfinance Bank.

The Commission said the account recorded total inflows of 71.7 million naira, adding that investigation did not identify any of the funds as coming from any government sources.

Adeyemi continued corresponding with members of the public using the World Investment Summit Group despite the alleged scheme had been exposed and disrupted in October 2025.

The ICPC investigation concluded that PFIPC operated through a combination of misrepresentation, alleged forgery, compromised officials and administrative engagements that created the appearance of a recognised federal government institution.

The commission said the case exposed weaknesses in verification procedures across some government institutions.

Those weaknesses enabled the purported council to gain access to government processes, including budget consideration, office allocation, digital identity registration and engagement with diplomatic stakeholders.