The Kwankwasiyya Movement has issued a strong call for transparency, urging the Presidency under President Bola Tinubu to fully explain the controversy surrounding the alleged Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC).
The group argues that the matter has transcended any single individual’s actions and now represents a critical test of public accountability, governance integrity, and the credibility of Nigeria’s budgetary processes.
In a statement issued on Saturday, July 4, 2026, and signed by its spokesperson, Dr. Habibu Sale Mohammed, the movement expressed deep concern over the unfolding saga.
It emphasized that while the Presidency has dismissed the PFIPC as a fictitious entity and distanced itself from claims made by its purported Director-General, reports of substantial budgetary allocations demand clear answers.
The scandal centers on Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Mathew, who positioned himself as the head of the PFIPC. The Presidency, through spokesperson Bayo Onanuga, has described Adeyemi as an impostor.
Authorities arrested him, and he faces multiple charges, including forgery and impersonation, in the Federal High Court in Abuja.
Investigators reportedly recovered forged documents, and police concluded that neither the council nor his appointment had any legal basis.
Adeyemi has pushed back vigorously. He has denied being a fraudster, claimed leadership roles in related bodies like the Presidential Economic Advisory Council, and alleged that high-level officials, including Chief of Staff to the President Femi Gbajabiamila, were involved.
At a June 25, 2026 press conference, he accused Gbajabiamila of receiving N400 million through a proxy and demanding an additional N200 million (plus a large share of a proposed N27.4 billion take-off grant) to facilitate his appointment and operations.
The Presidency has rejected these bribery claims, stating that Gbajabiamila promptly reported suspicions of fraud to the police and Department of State Services (DSS) as early as October 2025, after complaints from the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission (NIPC).
What has elevated the issue from a simple impersonation case to a broader governance crisis is the PFIPC’s appearance in the 2026 Appropriation Act.
Despite the Presidency’s disclaimers, the entity reportedly received allocations exceeding ₦1.3 billion for personnel, overheads, and capital expenditure.
This raises profound questions about Nigeria’s public finance machinery:
• How did a non-existent agency pass through the Budget Office, Federal Executive Council (FEC), ministerial defenses, and National Assembly scrutiny?
• Who proposed and approved the line items?
• Were any funds released or committed?
• How did the purported council secure office space in the Federal Secretariat, engage with agencies like the EFCC, NERC, and even foreign diplomats?
Former Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF) David Babachir Lawal has publicly questioned how such an entity could operate without executive knowledge, noting standard processes for agency recognition, appointments, and budgeting.
Opposition figures, including Atiku Abubakar, civil society groups like Afenifere, lawyers, and analysts have demanded independent probes, arguing that the Presidency cannot credibly investigate itself. Critics point to potential institutional failures across the executive, legislature, and bureaucracy.
The Kwankwasiyya Movement aligned with former Kano State Governor Rabiu Kwankwaso, framed its intervention as non-partisan. It stressed that Nigerians deserve answers to fundamental questions:
“If the council never existed, how did it find its way into the national budget? Who proposed and approved the allocation? Which government offices processed the documentation? Was any public money released or committed? If official documents were allegedly forged, how were they used for such a long period without detection?”
The statement highlighted the Tinubu administration’s promises of “renewed hope,” institutional reform, and responsible governance.
It warned that unresolved contradictions, silence, or deflection would erode public trust and damage Nigeria’s international image, particularly among foreign investors who scrutinize institutional credibility.
The movement called on the Presidency to publish a comprehensive account of the budgetary origins, administrative processes, and preventive measures. It also urged the National Assembly, EFCC, DSS, and other oversight bodies to launch independent investigations.
About The Author
