ABUJA — The Budget Office of the Federation has traced the controversial Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council, PFIPC, now declared fake by the Presidency and under ICPC investigation, to the Presidential Economic Advisory Council, PEAC, inaugurated by the late President Muhammadu Buhari on October 9, 2019.
Director-General of the Budget Office, Mr. Tanimu Yakubu, told the House of Representatives Ad Hoc Committee on Wednesday that by the time preparations for the 2026 budget began, other government institutions had already issued official documents relating to PFIPC, which the office was legally bound to work with.
Yakubu clarified that the Budget Office did not create PFIPC or approve its establishment. According to him, the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation assigned it an administrative code, while the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation approved an authorised establishment and a recruitment waiver.
“The Budget Office did not create the Council. It did not assign its code. It did not approve its establishment. It did not grant its recruitment waiver. It received official instruments and did what the law required of it: it measured their fiscal effect,” he said.
The council initially submitted a personnel estimate of N3.85 billion for 2026, but the Budget Office rejected the figure. Using the authorised establishment, approved waiver, and public service salary structure, the office independently computed N802,978,783, which was what eventually appeared in the Executive Budget proposal.
Lawmakers questioned the legal basis for the allocation after scrutinising a “purported Act” presented as PFIPC’s enabling law. Committee member Abubakar Fulata said the document was not genuine because it lacked a gazette number, the signature of the Clerk of the National Assembly, and the President’s assent.
Chairman of the Committee, Yusuf Gagdi, defended the Budget Office, noting that documents before the committee showed it acted on approvals issued by competent authorities. He added that the committee’s investigation had since established that the documents relied upon by those agencies were later discovered to be forged.
President Bola Tinubu has directed the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, ICPC, to investigate the “fictitious” PFIPC and the N1.3 billion inserted for it in the 2026 Appropriation Bill, with a report expected within 30 days. The self-acclaimed Director-General, Adeniyi Adeyemi, is in police detention and has been grilled by ICPC operatives.
Adeyemi allegedly operated from an office at the Federal Secretariat, opened bank accounts in the name of the non-existent agency, and claimed he paid N400 million through a proxy to secure the appointment. The Presidency has described him as an impostor and insisted PFIPC was never established by law or executive approval. The case has also drawn in Chief of Staff Femi Gbajabiamila, whose lawyers have denied any meeting or transaction.
The Budget Office insisted that no money was released to the council. “Not one kobo of the personnel provision could lawfully have been drawn, and not one kobo was drawn,” Yakubu stated. The House has resolved to probe how the non-existent agency secured a budget line, while the Senate said it would await the ICPC report before launching its own inquiry.
Has This Happened Elsewhere?
While outright “ghost agencies” with budget allocations are rare in established democracies, manipulation of budget processes is not new.
In Nigeria, the 2016 “budget padding” scandal involving former House Appropriations Chairman Abdulmumin Jibrin exposed how lawmakers inserted projects. Analysts say the PFIPC case represents a deeper breach because a private citizen allegedly created an agency from scratch, forged documents, and got it listed in the national budget with a N1.3 billion allocation.
Experts note that in the U.S., UK and other countries with strong institutional checks, a new federal entity cannot receive appropriations without an Act of Congress or Parliament and registration with the treasury.
Nigeria vs. U.S.: How Appointments and Agencies Are Created
The scandal has highlighted key differences in how Nigeria and the United States handle the creation of agencies and political appointments.
Legal Establishment
In Nigeria, a new MDA requires an Act of the National Assembly or an executive instrument, plus approvals from the Head of Service and Accountant-General. The PFIPC case shows weaknesses in verification, as the “purported Act” lacked basic features of a valid law.
In the U.S., a federal agency must be created by an Act of Congress signed by the President, or by executive order with clear statutory backing. It is then registered with the Office of Management and Budget and the Treasury. No appropriation can be made without congressional approval.
Budget Process
Nigeria’s budget moves from MDAs to the Federal Executive Council, then to the Budget Office, the President, and finally the National Assembly for defence and passage. PFIPC appeared on page 4 of the 2,790-page 2026 Appropriation Act under the Presidency, despite the Presidency disowning it.
In the U.S., the President submits a budget to Congress. Every agency justifies its request in public hearings before House and Senate appropriations committees. The Congressional Budget Office scores it, and no money can be spent without a bill passed by both chambers and signed into law.
Appointments
In Nigeria, major appointments require presidential nomination and, for some positions, Senate confirmation. Adeyemi allegedly claimed to have secured his appointment after paying a proxy, and relied on forged letters.
In the U.S., senior presidential appointments require Senate confirmation, FBI background checks, financial disclosure, and public hearings. Impersonating a federal official is a federal crime.
Political scientists say the PFIPC scandal points to systemic vulnerabilities in Nigeria’s budget and appointment process rather than an isolated error. They are calling for stricter verification, attachment of legal instruments to every budget line, and independent audits to prevent similar incidents in future appropriations
