In Nigerian politics, few things erode public trust faster than official statements that raise more questions than they answer.

The ongoing controversy involving Chief of Staff to the President, Rt. Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila, and Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew (who claims to be Director-General of the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council, or PFIPC, also linked to the Presidential Economic Advisory Council/PEAC) is a textbook case.

Gbajabiamila’s June 11, 2026, disclaimer was clear and firm: the “Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council” does not exist under the Tinubu administration. No appointment of Prince Adeyemi was made by his office.

The public, diplomatic missions, financial institutions, and others were advised to disregard any claims linking the entity to the Presidency.

That should have been the end of it — except it wasn’t. Prince Adeyemi has since held a press conference rejecting the denial outright, calling for President Tinubu to set up an independent investigative panel into alleged irregularities and “frauds” linked to the Chief of Staff.

He has made explosive allegations: that he paid ₦400 million upfront (through a proxy/intermediary) as part of a ₦600 million arrangement to secure the appointment, and that the real fallout came when he refused a demand for 48% of a proposed take-off grant (reported variously around ₦24–27.4 billion).

These are allegations. They must be treated as such until proven or disproven. But the response from the Office of the Chief of Staff has not closed the matter — it has widened the credibility gap.

The Dots That Refuse to Connect

Gbajabiamila’s position rests on one core claim: the agency “does not exist”. Yet verifiable public records contradict this simplicity:

– The 2026 Appropriation Act lists the “Presidential Economic Advisory Council/Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council” under the Presidency with a total allocation of ₦1,302,978,784 (approximately ₦1.3 billion). Breakdown: ₦802.98 million for personnel, ₦200 million for overhead, and ₦300 million for capital projects.

– Prince Adeyemi claims (and has not been directly refuted on specifics) that the entity has active accounts with the Central Bank of Nigeria (including domiciliary, pounds, and Treasury Single Account), office space at the Federal Secretariat, and over 300 staff approved by the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation.

If the agency truly does not exist in any form, how did its name and budget line appear in the national budget that passed through the usual rigorous processes (Budget Office, Ministry of Finance, National Assembly, and presidential assent)?

Who initiated the insertion?
Who processed staff approvals? Who opened and operated the CBN accounts?

These are not rhetorical flourishes — they are legitimate administrative questions that a simple “it does not exist” does not address.

Gbajabiamila’s disclaimer focuses narrowly on “no appointment by my office” and non-existence under the current administration. It does not engage with the budget reality, the administrative footprints Adeyemi cites, or the serious bribery and kickback allegations levelled directly against him personally.

This is where Gbajabiamila appears economical with the truth — not necessarily by outright falsehood, but by offering a narrow, incomplete rebuttal that leaves the most glaring inconsistencies dangling. In high office, especially as Chief of Staff, precision and fullness matter.

A press statement that sidesteps the budget line, staff approvals, and financial trail invites exactly the speculation and distrust now swirling.

Two Possible Realities — Both Damaging

Scenario 1: Prince Adeyemi’s claims are largely fabricated or exaggerated.

In this case, a man has publicly accused the Chief of Staff to the President of collecting ₦600 million in bribes and demanding a massive cut of a government grant.

That would itself constitute a grave national scandal — false accusation against a top presidential aide, potential damage to Nigeria’s international image, and reckless misuse of public discourse.

Adeyemi would need to face the full weight of the law for such serious falsehoods.

Scenario 2: There is substantial truth to the existence claims and the alleged dealings.

Then we have an even larger scandal: a disputed or quasi-official entity with real budget allocation, staff, and bank accounts, operating in the shadows of the Presidency until a public dispute forced a denial.

The questions of how it got there, who benefited, and why the denial came so late (after Adeyemi had been publicly parading the role) become urgent.

Either way, Nigerians lose. And either way, a mere disclaimer is insufficient.

What Nigerians Deserve

As a political analyst, I am less interested in the personalities and more in the documents and processes. The public deserves:

– The full, unredacted pages from the 2026 Appropriation Act showing the exact line item.

– Evidence (or lack thereof) of any appointment letter or official recognition.

– Payroll and staff approval records from the Head of Civil Service.

– CBN account opening and transaction records (if they exist).

– Any communication trails between the Office of the Chief of Staff and Prince Adeyemi or intermediaries.

– A transparent, independent investigation (not a one-sided press war) into the allegations of payments and demands.

Gbajabiamila is uniquely positioned to provide the missing lines that connect these dots.

He can clarify what his office knew, when it knew it, and why the budget line was allowed to stand if the entity was always considered non-existent. Silence or further minimalist statements will only deepen suspicion.

Nigeria has had enough of “it does not exist” when public records suggest otherwise.

Accountability is not optional at the heart of the Presidency. The longer these contradictions linger without full, evidence-based resolution, the more they damage institutional credibility — not just for one individual, but for the entire administration.

The dots are there. Nigerians are watching who will connect them honestly.

Pamela O.

Political Analyst and Socio-political commentator