The House of Representatives Committee investigating the operations of the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council has directed the Inspector-General of Police, Olatunji Disu, to produce the self-acclaimed Director-General of the organisation, Adeyemi Adeniyi, before it on Wednesday.
The directive was issued on Monday during the resumed investigative hearing at the National Assembly Complex, Abuja.
Representing the IG, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Bashir Abdullahi, appeared before the committee and was instructed to ensure Adeyemi’s appearance by noon on Wednesday to assist lawmakers in their ongoing investigation into the activities of the organisation.
The committee is probing the circumstances under which the PFIPC, despite not being legally established, allegedly secured office accommodation in Phase III of the Federal Secretariat Complex in Abuja and received a budgetary allocation of ₦1.32bn in the 2026 Appropriation Act.
The directive followed the Nigeria Police Force’s confirmation of key aspects of its criminal investigation, including petitions from the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President alleging that Adeyemi fraudulently presented himself as the Director-General of both the Presidential Economic Advisory Council and the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council.
The Committee Chairman, Yusuf Gagdi, said Adeyemi’s appearance had become imperative given the seriousness of the allegations and the institutions implicated in the matter. He stressed that the committee clearly needed the suspected DG to appear, noting that people’s names, integrity, and institutional credibility were all involved. He said it was no longer an option, adding that his presence was needed to confirm certain documents in a manner that would not undermine the committee’s investigation, so that it could submit its report on time.
The committee subsequently directed its clerk to formally communicate its resolution to the Inspector-General of Police. Gagdi declared that the committee had resolved that the IG should kindly present Adeyemi on Wednesday by 12 noon, describing it as the ruling of the committee.
Earlier, ACP Abdullahi informed lawmakers that although investigations were ongoing, the police had already filed an eight-count charge against Adeyemi before the Federal High Court. He explained that the Nigerian Police Force had investigated part of the case late last year and filed the charges, and that the matter was still before the court.
He disclosed that the suspect had been arrested and arraigned, but cautioned against making public disclosures that could prejudice the ongoing investigation or judicial proceedings. He explained that discussing matters still under investigation could prejudice the process and cause the public to form opinions that might prejudge the outcome of an investigation or judicial decision.
Despite the police’s reservations, the committee sought confirmation of documentary evidence already in its possession. The police confirmed that on October 17, 2025, the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President petitioned security agencies over allegations against Adeyemi, prompting investigations that culminated in criminal charges bordering on conspiracy and fraud.
Investigators also confirmed receiving another petition alleging that Adeyemi falsely presented himself as the Director-General of both the Presidential Economic Advisory Council and the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council. According to the police, the petition alleged that Adeyemi used the purported office to obtain accommodation within the Federal Secretariat, sought approval to recruit about 300 personnel, attempted to secure a $1.3 billion allocation in the 2026 Appropriation Act for the non-existent agency, and planned to organise a World Investment Summit under the platform of the purported council.
One of the highlights of the hearing came when the committee compared signatures on documents allegedly issued from the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President with signatures on authentic official correspondence obtained by the police. When asked whether the signatures matched, the police witness responded unequivocally that they were not the same.
The committee said the discrepancy reinforced concerns that official State House documents may have been forged. Gagdi further questioned whether it was only a letter that was suspected to be forged, noting that the committee was dealing with documents that included what was said to be a forged Act of the National Assembly, used in an attempt to establish a fake agency.
Gagdi disclosed that investigators had identified about 29 allegedly forged documents, including purported approvals from the State House, the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, the Ministry of Finance and several other government institutions. According to him, representatives of many of the affected agencies had already appeared before the committee and disowned the documents attributed to their offices.
Gagdi, however, stressed that the committee had deliberately avoided compelling the police to disclose information that could compromise ongoing criminal investigations, explaining that they were avoiding a situation where police would be pushed to make statements that could undermine their own probe.
He assured that the House investigation would continue independently and that its final report could recommend further action by relevant security agencies.
