…Rahman: “The bigger scandal is not one man’s alleged audacity. It is how a non-existent agency got close to N1.3 billion in the 2026 budget, secured office space in the heart of government, hosted top government functionaries from Nigeria and abroad, and allegedly operated multiple accounts.”
By Yinka Giwa
A senior aide to President Bola Tinubu, Tunde Rahman, has attributed the controversial Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) scandal, popularly dubbed “Gbajabiamila-gate”, to deep-rooted institutional failures rather than the alleged actions of a single individual, insisting that urgent reforms are needed to prevent a recurrence.
Rahman, who serves as Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Special Duties, argued that the scandal exposed serious weaknesses in Nigeria’s budgeting, appointment verification, and financial oversight systems, warning that unless the loopholes are plugged, “the next Adeyemi is somewhere forging another letterhead.”
In an opinion article published by KTH Daily today, Rahman maintained that although Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew, who is facing fraud and forgery charges, must answer for the allegations against him, the larger issue is how a non-existent government agency allegedly secured official recognition, office accommodation inside the Federal Secretariat, multiple bank accounts, and a budgetary allocation of nearly N1.3 billion.
According to him, the scandal should not be viewed as a personal battle between Adeyemi and the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, but as evidence of systemic collapse within government institutions.
“The bigger scandal is not one man’s alleged audacity. It is how a non-existent agency got close to N1.3 billion in the 2026 budget, secured office space in the heart of government, hosted top government functionaries from Nigeria and abroad, and allegedly operated multiple accounts,” Rahman wrote.
He questioned how the PFIPC, which he said has no legal backing and was never established by the Federal Government, found its way into the 2026 Appropriation Act without undergoing the scrutiny expected of government agencies.
Rahman cited claims that the allocation entered the budget through a “backdoor arrangement” without budget defence, describing the development as a major indictment of Nigeria’s fiscal oversight mechanisms.
He also raised concerns over the alleged use of a forged appointment letter bearing Gbajabiamila’s signature to obtain office space within the Federal Secretariat.
According to him, the incident demonstrated glaring weaknesses in the verification processes of the Federal Civil Service.
“If letterheads and signatures of top government functionaries are that easy to forge and accept, then no ministry, department or agency is safe,” he warned.
The presidential aide further questioned how the alleged fake agency reportedly operated Treasury Single Account facilities and several bank accounts despite existing Know Your Customer (KYC) requirements.
He called on the Central Bank of Nigeria and financial institutions to explain how such accounts could have been opened and linked to government platforms.
Rahman rejected attempts to directly implicate Gbajabiamila in the scandal, noting that the Chief of Staff has consistently denied ever meeting Adeyemi and has instituted a N10 billion defamation suit against him over allegations that he demanded 48 per cent of a purported N27.4 billion take-off grant.
He also stressed that appointments into federal agencies are not issued by the Chief of Staff but through the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation.
Rahman disclosed that it was the Office of the Chief of Staff that first raised the alarm after the Nigeria Investment Promotion Council reportedly flagged the existence of the controversial agency, leading to Adeyemi’s arrest and prosecution.
He commended President Tinubu for directing the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission to conclude its investigation into the matter within one month, describing the directive as evidence of the administration’s commitment to accountability.
While cautioning against what he described as premature judgment of the Chief of Staff, Rahman insisted that due process must be allowed to take its course.
“The CoS should not be guillotined. There should be a presumption of innocence until he is proven guilty,” he stated.
To prevent similar incidents, Rahman proposed far-reaching reforms, including legislation to strengthen budget integrity by ensuring that every allocation is tied to a legally established agency and subjected to legislative scrutiny.
He also advocated the creation of a central digital portal for verifying all presidential appointments before they are recognised by ministries and agencies.
Other recommendations include a forensic audit of office allocations within the Federal Secretariat and stricter banking procedures requiring verification of government-linked accounts against official corporate and identity databases before activation.
Rahman concluded that while individuals involved in the PFIPC affair should face the law, the episode ultimately revealed institutional weaknesses that require urgent attention.
“The PFIPC scandal is a stress test, and the system failed at three points: budget, appointment, and banking,” he wrote.