The African Democratic Congress has accused the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission of shielding some government officials in its investigation into the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council.
The opposition party said the controversy surrounding the PFIPC went beyond the Director-General of the council, Adeniyi Adeyemi, who has been recommended for prosecution by the anti-corruption agency.
The ADC made its position known in a statement issued on Saturday by its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, describing the ICPC’s interim report on the matter as “predictable” and “inadequate.”
The party alleged that the report appeared more focused on protecting government officials than investigating the full extent of the alleged scandal.
The ICPC had on Thursday recommended Adeyemi for prosecution after concluding that the PFIPC had no legal backing and did not exist as a government agency.
The commission also cleared the Presidency and the Central Bank of Nigeria of wrongdoing but attributed the development to institutional lapses within some ministries, departments and agencies.
ADC questions ICPC findings
Reacting to the report, the ADC said the commission had failed to answer fundamental questions about how an agency it described as fictitious was able to operate within the Federal Government structure.
The party questioned how the PFIPC allegedly secured office space within the Federal Secretariat, had civil servants deployed to it and appeared in the 2026 Appropriation Act with a reported allocation of N1.3bn.
The ADC recalled that it had opposed President Bola Tinubu’s decision to mandate the ICPC to investigate the matter, arguing instead for an independent investigative panel.
“It would be recalled that when President Bola Tinubu directed the ICPC to undertake investigation into this case, ADC had waved it off, insisting instead on a full investigation by an independent panel,” the party said.
It added, “With the so-called interim report of the ICPC, our fears have come to pass as the report is not only predictable, it appears more concerned with exonerating government officials rather than providing clear answers to the serious questions that the scandal has raised.”
The opposition party also rejected the ICPC’s suggestion that the controversy was largely the result of procedural or institutional failures.
“The ICPC report appeared to have given the impression that what happened was mere failure in government processes or procedures,” the ADC said.
“This position is difficult to sustain in the light of publicly available evidence, which establishes that this is not an error of omission or a mere glitch in the system.
“Instead, what happened was a grand scam that could have been possible only with the active connivance of government officials and institutions at the highest level.”
Party questions Adeyemi’s prosecution
The ADC also questioned the decision to recommend only Adeyemi for prosecution while the ICPC acknowledged that its investigation was still ongoing and that other individuals within government could have been involved.
The party asked why the commission had chosen to publicly release what it described as an interim report instead of submitting it to the President as a confidential brief while investigations continued.
“If all that the commission had to present was a preliminary report, why not simply present it as confidential brief to the president instead of making a public drama of it in a manner that potentially prejudiced the overall investigation and cast Adeyemi as the principal culprit?” the party asked.
According to the ADC, the central issue requiring investigation was how an alleged fictitious government agency was able to obtain the approvals, personnel, office accommodation and other institutional support required to operate.
“What Nigerians expected was an investigation into how a ‘fictitious agency’ managed to obtain all authorisations and institutional support required to operate as a legitimate government agency,” the party said.
The ADC argued that the circumstances surrounding the PFIPC suggested that its operations could not have been carried out by one individual acting alone.
The party further questioned how Adeyemi, acting alone, could have secured government office accommodation, obtained the deployment of civil servants, secured an alleged N1.3bn allocation in the 2026 budget, acquired official vehicles with customised number plates and obtained armed security.
The party asked:
“If, according to the ICPC report, Adeyemi had kicked down the door of the Secretariat office and allocated it to himself, did he also deploy the civil servants to himself, allocate a reported N1.3 billion to himself in the 2026 Appropriation Act, allocate official vehicles with customised number plates to himself and deploy armed security to himself?”
The ADC maintained that the questions raised by the PFIPC controversy could only be adequately addressed through a comprehensive investigation capable of identifying all individuals and institutions involved.
The party reiterated its call for an independent investigation into the matter, insisting that Nigerians deserved clear answers on how the alleged fictitious council was able to function within the Federal Government structure and access public resources.
