The House of Representatives Ad Hoc Committee investigating the controversial Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) has exonerated the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, from allegations that he authorised, established or participated in the activities of the purported agency.
The committee, chaired by Rep. Yusuf Adamu Gagdi, said its preliminary findings showed that there was no evidence linking Gbajabiamila to the organisation or to the appointment of its purported Director-General, Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi.
The panel specifically examined a letter allegedly appointing Adeyemi as PFIPC Director-General and purportedly bearing Gbajabiamila’s authority and signature. It said evidence obtained from the State House established that the letter was neither issued nor signed by the Chief of Staff.
The committee also found that the document was not printed on authentic State House letterhead and carried a reference number inconsistent with the Presidency’s official correspondence system.
“The documentary evidence presently before the Committee does not establish that the Chief of Staff authorised, approved, established or participated in the activities of the purported organisation,” the lawmakers said.
Rather, the panel found that Gbajabiamila had taken steps to trigger investigations after concerns about the purported agency were brought to his attention.
According to the committee, the Chief of Staff responded to an alert from the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission by communicating with the Nigeria Police Force, Office of the National Security Adviser, Department of State Services and Economic and Financial Crimes Commission.
The panel said he also initiated administrative verification through relevant government institutions and took further steps when additional concerns emerged over the organisation and a proposed World Investment Summit.
It therefore commended Gbajabiamila for what it described as timely security and administrative interventions, saying the evidence before it showed that he acted to facilitate investigation rather than participate in the activities of the purported agency.
The committee stressed that its findings were preliminary and that its final report would determine the responsibilities of individuals and institutions involved in the wider PFIPC controversy.
