The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) has concluded its investigation into the controversy surrounding the alleged existence of the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC).
The development comes as the House of Representatives ad hoc committee probing the matter says it will brief the public on its findings this week before presenting its final report to the House, following weeks of investigation into the controversial council.
President Bola Tinubu had, on July 7, 2026, directed the ICPC to investigate the controversy and submit its report within 30 days in a bid to unravel the circumstances surrounding the council.
Sources within the anti-graft agency disclosed that the prime suspect in the case, Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi, who presented himself as the director-general of the purported council, has been interrogated.
According to the sources, Adeyemi was questioned on Thursday at the headquarters of the Intelligence Response Team (IRT), located within the premises of the former Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS) facility in Guzape, Abuja, where he has remained in custody since his arrest.
The sources revealed that although the interrogation was initially scheduled for Wednesday, it was postponed because his lawyer was unavailable. ICPC investigators later returned the following day to conduct the interview after several other individuals connected to the investigation had already been questioned.
The ICPC is expected to submit its final report before the deadline set by the president.
Meanwhile, Adeyemi has appealed to the House of Representatives ad hoc committee to allow him to testify, insisting he is being made a scapegoat and warning that any report produced without hearing from him would be incomplete and violate his constitutional right to a fair hearing.
In a statement issued through his legal team, led by Festus Akhigbe, Adeyemi argued that it would have been impossible for a single individual to establish and operate a federal government agency without the knowledge and participation of multiple government institutions.
His lawyers urged the committee, chaired by Hon. Yusuf Adamu Gagdi, to facilitate his appearance before the panel, maintaining that denying him the opportunity to testify would undermine the credibility of the investigation.
During its last public hearing on July 29, the committee disclosed that it had uncovered what it described as extensive document fraud but said it would complete its investigation after carrying out final verification with the remaining government agencies linked to the matter.
Committee Chairman Yusuf Gagdi explained that lawmakers could not hear directly from Adeyemi because he remains in custody under a valid court order, stressing that the committee had respected the judicial process while continuing its investigation.
According to Gagdi, documentary evidence obtained by the panel points to widespread forgery, including the creation and use of a purported Directorate of Administration and Support Services under the State House, which investigators said does not exist.
He added that the committee would carry out additional verification of documents and hold follow-up engagements with relevant government agencies to resolve outstanding issues before presenting a comprehensive report to the House.
However, Adeyemi’s legal team maintained that available records contradict claims that he single-handedly fabricated the council.
The lawyers argued that several federal institutions—including the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation, the Central Bank of Nigeria, the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, the Budget Office of the Federation and the National Assembly—had official dealings with the PFIPC.
They also claimed that security agencies participated in programmes organised by the council, while the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) allocated office space to the PFIPC and recognised its leadership.
According to the legal team, it would have been administratively impossible for one individual to mislead multiple government institutions into approving structures, assigning personnel, opening government accounts and securing budgetary allocations.
They insisted that Adeyemi was being unfairly blamed for broader institutional failures and administrative lapses, urging the House committee to hear directly from him before finalising its report.
Also commenting on the matter, the Director of the Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD), Dr. Garuba Dauda, called on the House panel to allow Adeyemi to defend himself before reaching a final conclusion.
Dauda argued that the suspect’s detention should not prevent lawmakers from obtaining his testimony, noting that the National Assembly could seek the necessary court order to facilitate his appearance.
He warned that any report submitted without giving Adeyemi an opportunity to testify could face questions over its credibility and legal standing.
