By Sunday Ameh
Human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana (SAN), has called on the Federal Government to provide a comprehensive explanation on the controversy surrounding the alleged Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC), saying the Presidency’s response has failed to address critical issues.
Falana, who spoke on Friday during an interview on Frontline, a current affairs programme on Eagle 102.5 FM, Ilese-Ijebu, Ogun State, said the official explanation issued by the Presidency left several unanswered questions and had exposed the country to ridicule.
According to him, Nigerians deserve full disclosure on the circumstances surrounding the alleged operations of the council.
“Unfortunately, I think there is more to this matter than meets the eye. Nigerians have not been given the full facts. I’ve read Mr. Bayo Onanuga speaking for the Presidency. To say it very mildly, the country has been exposed to unprecedented ridicule. The government must appreciate that they are dealing with civilised people, so the government must come out more clearly on this matter,” he said.
Falana questioned how an agency which the Presidency insists was never created by law allegedly found its way into the country’s governance structure.
He wondered how the purported council allegedly secured an office at the Federal Secretariat, opened accounts with the Central Bank of Nigeria, received civil servants and was reportedly captured in the 2026 Appropriation Act.
“How did an agency that is not created by law find its way into the Appropriation Act of Nigeria? How did that body get an office in the Federal Secretariat? How did that body successfully open accounts in the Central Bank of Nigeria? How did the Head of Service post about 300 staff to that office?” he asked.
The senior advocate argued that the controversy extends beyond the criminal case involving the alleged promoter of the council, insisting that key government institutions must account for their roles.
According to him, the National Assembly also has questions to answer regarding the alleged inclusion of the council in the national budget.
“You cannot have an agency that is not created by law in the budget of a country. You cannot put an agency that is unknown to law in the Appropriation Act. The National Assembly members will have to explain who authorised them to insert the body into the budget,” he said.
Falana maintained that appropriation bills originate from the Executive under Section 81 of the Constitution before being transmitted to the legislature, making it necessary for the Federal Government to explain how the agency allegedly appeared in the budget.
Describing the Presidency’s statement as inadequate, he said it left “gaping holes” that only an independent investigation could resolve.
“If this is a conman that can con the Presidency into issuing a letter of appointment, con the Central Bank into opening accounts, con the National Assembly into inserting the agency into the budget, I think the government is kidding,” he added.
Falana also called for the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, to temporarily step aside to allow an independent investigation.
“The government has a duty to ask Mr. Gbajabiamila to step aside to allow for a full investigation in the interest of the country and even in his own interest,” he said.
While supporting the ongoing criminal prosecution of the alleged promoter of the council, Falana argued that the court proceedings would not address broader institutional concerns.
“The law must be allowed to take its course. But there are issues that are not going to come up in court. The court is not going to tell us who opened an account in the Central Bank. The court is not going to tell us who inserted the agency into the budget or why it was signed by the President,” he said.
He urged the Federal Government to reopen its inquiry and involve all relevant agencies to ensure transparency.
“The government will have to revisit the matter, go back to the drawing board and issue another statement that will be acceptable to Nigerians by assuring them that there is no cover-up in this matter,” he said.
The controversy began after the Presidency disowned the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council and its alleged Director-General, Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew, describing the body as non-existent.
However, the matter escalated after documents from the 2026 Appropriation Act reportedly showed a budgetary allocation of about ₦1.3 billion for an entity listed as the Presidential Economic Advisory Council/Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council.
The development has triggered calls from opposition figures, civil society groups and governance advocates for an independent investigation into how the alleged agency reportedly appeared in the federal budget, operated from the Federal Secretariat and allegedly maintained accounts with the Central Bank of Nigeria despite the Presidency’s denial of its existence.
Leave a Reply