A fresh controversy has erupted around the alleged Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) following a press conference by Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew, who publicly challenged the Presidency’s disclaimer of the organisation and levelled a series of allegations against Chief of Staff to the President, Rt. Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila.
The development marks a significant escalation in a dispute that has generated widespread public debate over the existence of the PFIPC, its appearance in government documents, and the integrity of administrative processes within the Presidency.
Earlier this month, the Office of the Chief of Staff issued a formal disclaimer stating that the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council does not exist under the administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and warning members of the public against recognising any appointments purportedly made under its auspices. The Presidency also denied that Prince Adeyemi had been appointed by the Office of the Chief of Staff.
However, in a strongly-worded address to journalists, Adeyemi rejected the government’s position, insisting that the issue extends beyond official denials and now raises fundamental questions about governance, accountability and the credibility of official records.
“I will not be intimidated,” he declared. “I would rather die as a man than live as a coward.”
Opening his remarks, Adeyemi wished Chief of Staff Femi Gbajabiamila a happy birthday, describing the press conference itself as a “birthday gift.”
He added that while celebrations were ongoing, Nigerians deserved answers regarding both the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) and the Presidential Economic Advisory Council (PEAC).
Questions Over Budget References
Central to Adeyemi’s argument is his claim that the PFIPC was referenced in Nigeria’s 2026 Appropriation Act.
According to him, if the Presidency now maintains that the council never existed, it must explain how references to the body allegedly appeared in official budget documents that eventually received presidential assent.
He questioned the entire chain of the budget process – from technical drafting through executive review, Budget Office scrutiny and legislative approval – arguing that such references could not simply have appeared without institutional knowledge.
“If the agency does not exist,” he asked, “how did its name enter the 2026 Appropriation Act?”
The question echoes concerns raised in recent days by some commentators and civil society groups, who have similarly called for clarification over reported references to the PFIPC in budget documents. Independent verification of the significance or legal status of those references remains outstanding.
Administrative Contradictions
Adeyemi argued that if the Chief of Staff was genuinely unaware of the organisation, despite what he described as presidential documents referencing it, this would suggest serious failures in administrative coordination within government.
He further questioned whether multiple institutions – including the Budget Office, the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation, the Central Bank of Nigeria, the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation and the Office of the Head of the Civil Service – could all have processed documentation relating to a non-existent agency without detection.
He claimed the council had operated from office space within the Federal Secretariat and alleged that hundreds of staff had been approved for it, although these assertions have not been independently verified.
Serious Allegations Against Chief of Staff
The most explosive portion of Adeyemi’s address involved allegations directed at Chief of Staff Femi Gbajabiamila.
Adeyemi alleged that disagreements arose after the Chief of Staff demanded 48 per cent of an alleged take-off grant amounting to ₦27.39 billion for the council. He further claimed that ₦400 million had been collected through intermediaries, with an outstanding balance of ₦200 million.
He also alleged attempts to portray his diplomatic engagements as espionage and accused unnamed officials of attempting to intimidate him through security institutions.
No documentary evidence was presented during the press conference to substantiate these claims, and the Chief of Staff has not publicly responded to the specific allegations contained in Adeyemi’s latest statement.
Rather than limiting his demands to a public exchange, Adeyemi called on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to establish an independent investigative panel.
Among the issues he wants investigated are:
● the circumstances surrounding the death of Babatunde Tanimola, whom he described as an intermediary;
● alleged attempts on his life, including an attack on the Abuja–Kaduna Expressway in September 2025;
● forensic examination of official documents signed by the Chief of Staff;
● a review of budgetary references to the PFIPC;
and whether the Chief of Staff should step aside while investigations are conducted.
He urged that the panel include representatives of civil society organisations and international bodies, insisting that any findings should be published transparently.
“If I am wrong,” he said, “let an independent process prove it. If Hon. Gbajabiamila is right, let it confirm it.”
The Presidency has consistently maintained that no organisation known as the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council exists within the current administration.
In its official disclaimer issued on June 11, 2026, the Office of the Chief of Staff advised foreign missions, financial institutions, development partners and security agencies not to recognise any claims or appointments made under the name of the council. The statement also denied that Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi had been appointed by the Chief of Staff or by the Presidency.
That disclaimer prompted extensive public discussion, with some commentators supporting the Presidency’s clarification while others called for greater transparency regarding reported references to the council in public records.
The controversy has since generated debate among policy analysts, civic organisations and sections of the media over whether a fuller explanation from relevant government agencies is necessary.
Some analysts argue that any appearance of the PFIPC in official budgetary or administrative documentation – if accurately represented – would warrant clarification from the appropriate authorities to preserve public confidence in government processes.
Others maintain that the Presidency’s disclaimer should be regarded as definitive unless credible evidence establishes otherwise.
At present, many of the competing claims remain untested.
Adeyemi’s allegations concerning financial demands, intimidation, attempted assassination, official appointments, banking arrangements and government approvals have not been independently verified.
Similarly, the Presidency has not publicly addressed each of the detailed allegations raised during the latest press conference beyond its earlier blanket disclaimer denying the existence of the PFIPC.
The dispute therefore remains unresolved, with both sides presenting sharply conflicting accounts.
Whether the Federal Government establishes the independent investigation requested by Adeyemi may determine whether the controversy evolves into an institutional inquiry or remains a prolonged public dispute.
For now, the PFIPC controversy has become one of the most closely watched political accountability debates in recent weeks, raising broader questions about transparency, documentation, institutional oversight and public confidence in government administration.
Below is a full text of Prince Adeyemi’s statement:
My fellow Nigerians, members of the press, distinguished ladies and gentlemen,
I address you today not out of convenience, but out of necessity. I stand before you under a cloud of public misrepresentation, institutional denial, and deliberate attempts to silence legitimate questions of national interest.
First, let me wish Rt. Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila a happy birthday. This press conference is also a birthday gift to him. While celebrating, he should remember that Nigerians are waiting for answers on the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council, PFIPC, and the Presidential Economic Advisory Council, PEAC.
I will not be intimidated
Let me be clear: I will not be intimidated. I will not be discredited without response. You cannot beat a child and expect him not to cry. When pain is inflicted, a response is inevitable. I will not allow my name to be used as a shield in a matter that demands full transparency.
I would rather die as a man than live as a coward.
The core contradiction
On 11th June 2026, the Chief of Staff to the President, Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila, issued a disclaimer distancing the Office from PFIPC and PEAC. My name has been drawn into this matter.
I reject any attempt to reduce this to denials without addressing the fundamental questions Nigerians are asking. The issue is no longer about personalities. It is about contradictions that demand answers.
If the Chief of Staff, who is the administrative gateway to the Presidency, claims he is unaware of an agency, yet the President signed documents referencing it, then there is a serious administrative failure. If the agency does not exist, how did its name enter the 2026 Appropriation Act, specifically pages 50 and 51?
Questions for the budget process
If PFIPC is non-existent but is in the national budget, it raises questions about the integrity of the entire 2026 budget process. The budget does not emerge in isolation. It passes through technical drafting, executive coordination, ministerial inputs, Budget Office review, and legislative scrutiny by 109 Senators and 360 Representatives.
So, at what point did references to a non-existent agency enter official records? And what does that imply about the process that produced and approved those documents?
For the President to have assented to a budget containing an agency his Chief of Staff now says does not exist is an embarrassment to government.
Questions on accounts and staff approvals
If the agency does not exist, why does it allegedly have a domiciliary account, a pounds account, and a Treasury Single Account domiciled at the Central Bank of Nigeria? Is the CBN Governor, his deputies, directors, and staff incapable of detecting fraudulent account opening documents?
Note that CBN account opening begins with the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation. Is the Chief of Staff saying the Accountant-General and his corps of directors and professionals failed to detect forgery?
How did the agency secure office space at the Federal Secretariat and operate for over a year? Are we to believe the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, with six Permanent Secretaries and multiple directors, was unaware?
The Head of Civil Service approved 314 staff for the said agency. Is she also incompetent?
Allegations of intimidation and financial demands
I am compelled to address attempts to portray me as a fraudulent actor. That portrayal is false and damaging to my reputation.
It has been alleged that there were considerations to use security institutions to frame my diplomatic engagements as espionage or disloyalty. I categorically reject any attempt to criminalize lawful activity.
For clarity: the major point of disagreement with the Chief of Staff arose after he allegedly requested 48% of the take-off grant of ₦27,395,510,136 from the same agency he now denies exists. I rejected the demand. He allegedly collected ₦400 million by proxy, with a balance of ₦200 million to secure the appointment.
Is the Chief of Staff open to an examination of all documents and communication trails in the President’s Office?
Calls for an independent investigation
Silence will not resolve this. Only truth will. I therefore appeal to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR, for the immediate establishment of an independent investigative panel to:
1. Investigate the death of Mr. Babatunde Tanimola, the intermediary between myself and the Chief of Staff, who police said died in a fire accident at a hotel in Utako, Abuja on 22nd October 2025, a day after the Chief of Staff’s petition was received by police.
2. Investigate several attempts on my life, including the attack on 7th September 2025 along the Abuja-Kaduna Expressway, during which vital documents and two phones were taken. I reported to the police and DSS. I was told the phones were tracked to Gombe, but an insider said an order was given to take no further action.
3. Compel the Chief of Staff to produce all official documents signed since assuming office for forensic analysis.
4. Ask the Chief of Staff to step aside pending the panel’s outcome, as he has allegedly used his office to intimidate persons and media houses.
5. Review budgetary references and institutional records, and question all relevant actors, with findings published transparently.
The panel should include credible civil society and international organizations. If I am wrong, let an independent process prove it. If Hon. Gbajabiamila is right, let it confirm it.
Conclusion
To civil society, the media, religious and traditional institutions: your engagement matters.
To Nigerians: focus on facts, not distractions.
Pages 50 and 51 of the 2026 Appropriation Act are cited as proof. I remain willing to cooperate fully with any lawful inquiry. I will not accept being silenced or discredited.
Let the investigation speak. Let the documents speak. Let the truth emerge.
God bless the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Thank you.
Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew