PFIPC: Punishing ‘impostor’ won’t explain who opened govt doors — ADC

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has dismissed the interim report by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) concerning the alleged fake Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC). The opposition party contends that the report inadequately addresses how a non-existent agency gained access to the government's machinery.

“

The ICPC report appeared to have given the impression that what happened was mere failure in government processes or procedures. This position is difficult to sustain in the light of publicly available evidence.

According to the ADC, the core issue is not merely an individual posing as an official, but the broader question of how the supposed fake agency secured office space at the Federal Secretariat, obtained civil servants, official vehicles, armed security, and a N1.3 billion budget allocation for 2026. The party views the ICPC report as an attempt at damage control rather than a thorough investigation.

"The ICPC report appeared to have given the impression that what happened was mere failure in government processes or procedures. This position is difficult to sustain in the light of publicly available evidence," stated Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, the ADC's National Publicity Secretary. The party highlighted that the PFIPC lacked legal creation or legitimate executive approval yet operated with institutional backing.

“

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 ADC specifically took issue with the ICPC's recommendation to prosecute an individual, Adeyemi, while vaguely suggesting other accomplices within the government without identification. The party questioned the public release of a preliminary report, suggesting it could prejudice the investigation and unfairly cast Adeyemi as the primary culprit. They emphasized that budgetary provisions do not materialize accidentally and leave a clear audit trail, demanding an explanation for how the N1.3 billion allocation was processed.

“

To prosecute Mr. Adeyemi without answering these questions would be to punish the man who entered through the window while refusing to ask who left the doors open.