The House of Representatives ad hoc committee investigating the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC) is set to question the Accountant-General of the Federation, Mr Shamseldeen Ogunjimi, today as its high-profile probe enters the third week.
The committee, chaired by Yusuf Gagdi (Kanke/Kanam/Pankshin Federal Constituency, Plateau State), is examining how an organisation the Federal Government has described as non-existent allegedly secured official office accommodation within the Federal Secretariat Complex in Abuja and received a budgetary allocation of more than N1.32 billion in the 2026 Appropriation Act.
The investigation has attracted significant public attention over claims that the agency operated within government structures despite lacking legal recognition, raising serious questions about possible lapses in public financial management and institutional oversight.
At today’s hearing, Ogunjimi is expected to explain how the PFIPC obtained a government budget code, a step that allowed the body to appear in the national budget despite doubts over its legal status. His testimony is anticipated to shed more light on the budgetary and financial processes that facilitated the agency’s inclusion in the federal expenditure framework.
Since the probe began, the committee has taken evidence from several top government officials whose testimonies revealed apparent gaps in administrative processes that enabled the PFIPC to function as though it had official approval.
Those who have already appeared include the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Mrs Didi Walson-Jack; the Director of Banking Services at the Central Bank of Nigeria, Abdullahi Hamisu; and the Director-General of the Budget Office of the Federation, Mr Tanimu Yakubu.
Their submissions focused on the sequence of events that allowed the PFIPC to navigate bureaucratic procedures, obtain official documentation, and become integrated into aspects of the federal administrative system.
The investigation gained further momentum following the arrest of Mr Adeyemi Adeniyi, who presented himself as the Director-General of the PFIPC. He was arrested by the Nigeria Police Force after allegedly claiming that he paid N400 million through an intermediary to the Chief of Staff to the President, Mr Femi Gbajabiamila, to secure his appointment.
Both the Presidency and Gbajabiamila have firmly denied any connection to Adeniyi or the claims made against him. The Presidency described him as an impostor, while the Chief of Staff dismissed the allegations as false, insisting that neither he nor the Presidency had any involvement in the establishment or operations of the purported agency.
Government officials have consistently maintained that the PFIPC is not a legally established federal agency — a position that has deepened concerns over how it managed to secure office space, process official documents, and obtain budgetary provisions.
The committee is expected to determine whether administrative failures, institutional negligence, or deliberate misconduct enabled the agency to operate within the federal bureaucracy.
Beyond the Accountant-General, several other senior officials are still expected to appear before the panel. These include the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, George Akume; the Inspector-General of Police, Olatunji Disu; the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Bianca Odumegwu-Ojukwu; the Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Mr Taiwo Oyedele; and the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi.
Their testimonies are expected to help the committee establish whether due process was followed and whether any public officials played a role in facilitating the agency’s activities.
The House committee has reiterated its commitment to a thorough, transparent, and non-partisan investigation, stressing that anyone found culpable will be held accountable in accordance with the law. Lawmakers say the probe aims to strengthen public institutions, safeguard public funds, and restore confidence in government systems by identifying the weaknesses that allowed the PFIPC controversy to arise.