The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) has uncovered two additional entities allegedly operating as fake government agencies as part of its ongoing investigation into the activities of Adeniyi Matthew Adeyemi, who reportedly presented himself as the Director-General of the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC).
The development was disclosed by the ICPC Chairman, Dr Musa Adamu Aliyu, after he presented an interim report of the investigation to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu at the Presidential Villa in Abuja.
The findings have raised fresh concerns about the misuse of government identity, forged official documents and weaknesses in institutional verification processes.
ICPC Says PFIPC Had No Legal Foundation
According to the ICPC chairman, the investigation found that Adeyemi was never appointed by the Federal Government to head the PFIPC.
The commission also determined that the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council was not established by any law or valid executive order.
Aliyu said an appointment letter allegedly used by Adeyemi was found to be forged, while the organisation itself had no recognised legal foundation as a Federal Government institution.
The alleged use of official-looking documents and government facilities therefore became a central focus of the investigation.
Former Government Offices Allegedly Taken Over
The ICPC said the organisation took over offices and facilities previously associated with the former Presidential Economic Advisory Council (PEAC).
According to the commission, the facilities were subsequently used in activities involving alleged false representation and impersonation.
The development underscores the potential risks posed when individuals or organisations operate under the appearance of government authority without proper legal backing.
Two Additional Entities Uncovered
The investigation has now expanded beyond PFIPC, with the ICPC identifying two other entities that it described as fake agencies.
They are the FCT Investment Promotion Agency (FIPA) and the Foreign Investment Promotion Agency (FIPA).
The commission said the entities were allegedly created using forged legislative documents and were subsequently used to establish bank accounts connected to the activities under investigation.
The discovery has prompted investigators to examine how the entities were presented to members of the public, financial institutions and government establishments.
How the Alleged Scheme Evolved
Aliyu explained that the investigation showed that Adeyemi initially operated under the name Foreign Investment Promotion Council before changing the name to the Foreign Intervention Promotion Council.
According to the ICPC chairman, the activities associated with the organisation were also allegedly expanded to include revenue-generating functions.
Investigators are examining the circumstances surrounding the changes and the extent to which the entities may have been used to create an impression of official government authority.
No Government Funding Found So Far
Despite the scale of the alleged activities, the ICPC said its interim investigation had not established that government funds were approved or released to the fake agency.
The commission also said it found no evidence of security breaches within the State House or the Central Bank of Nigeria that facilitated the organisation’s operations.
That finding is significant because it suggests that the investigation is focused primarily on alleged impersonation, forged documentation, unauthorised representation and the involvement of individuals who may have assisted the operation.
Public Officers Under Investigation
The ICPC chairman disclosed that investigators had identified individuals linked to several government institutions who may have had some form of involvement or provided assistance to the alleged illegal operation.
The institutions mentioned include the:
Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation;
Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation;
Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation;
Budget Office; and
National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA).
The ICPC, however, described its findings as part of an ongoing investigation, meaning that the identification of individuals or institutions does not by itself establish criminal liability.
Further investigations are expected to determine the nature and extent of any involvement before appropriate legal or administrative action is taken.
ICPC Recommends Prosecution and Administrative Sanctions
Based on its interim findings, the commission has recommended the prosecution of Adeyemi and administrative sanctions against public officials found to have assisted the alleged illegal activities.
It also recommended reforms aimed at strengthening internal controls and verification mechanisms across government institutions.
Such reforms could help reduce the possibility of individuals presenting forged documents or unauthorised entities as legitimate government bodies.
Investigation Still Ongoing
The ICPC stressed that the report submitted to President Tinubu was only an interim report.
Investigators are continuing their work to establish additional facts, identify other persons who may have been involved and gather evidence that could support criminal charges.
The ongoing nature of the investigation means that further findings could emerge as investigators examine documents, financial transactions, communications and institutional records connected to the alleged activities.
President Tinubu was said to have taken note of the findings and reaffirmed his administration’s commitment to transparency, accountability and stronger institutional controls.
What the Investigation Means for Government Accountability
The PFIPC investigation highlights the importance of proper verification of government appointments, agencies and official documents.
Government institutions often interact with businesses, investors, financial institutions and members of the public. The existence of an unauthorised organisation operating under the appearance of government authority can therefore create significant legal, financial and reputational risks.
Beyond the immediate investigation, the case could lead to renewed attention on how government agencies verify official appointments, authenticate legislative documents, allocate office facilities and approve the use of government identities.
It also reinforces the role of anti-corruption institutions in identifying alleged impersonation and fraudulent representation involving public institutions.
For now, the ICPC investigation remains ongoing, and any person ultimately accused of an offence will be entitled to due process under Nigerian law.
The commission is expected to continue examining the activities of the alleged fake agencies before submitting its final findings and pursuing any prosecution or other measures supported by the evidence.