The Senate is expected to come under renewed pressure this week as lawmakers prepare to examine the controversy surrounding a N1.3 billion allocation made to the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) in the 2026 Appropriation Act.
The matter is expected to feature prominently when plenary resumes on Tuesday, following mounting concerns over how an agency whose legal status has been questioned secured a place in the federal budget.
At the centre of the controversy are allegations that the council received a budgetary allocation without undergoing the standard legislative scrutiny required of government agencies. Sources familiar with the process claim that no representative of the PFIPC appeared before the Senate Committee on Establishment and Public Service to defend the proposed expenditure before it was approved.
The latest revelations have also shifted attention to what insiders describe as a chain of administrative failures that allegedly allowed the council to present itself as a legitimate government institution for more than a year.
Officials within the Presidency and the federal civil service, who spoke anonymously because they were not authorised to comment publicly, alleged that the controversy began with a forged appointment letter purportedly issued from the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President. The document reportedly carried a fake signature attributed to Chief of Staff Femi Gbajabiamila and was allegedly processed by officials without undergoing proper authentication.
According to the sources, the document was subsequently used by Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Mathew to obtain office accommodation at the Federal Secretariat Complex in Abuja. The office space, they said, gave the council an official government presence that helped reinforce perceptions that it was a recognised federal institution.
The alleged oversight did not stop there.
Multiple sources argued that the controversy exposed weaknesses across several government institutions responsible for verifying official documents and screening agencies before they are incorporated into government activities and budgets.
Among the institutions mentioned were the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, the Budget Office and the House of Representatives. According to the officials, more rigorous verification at any of these stages could have raised questions about the council’s status before it gained wider acceptance across government.
They further claimed that the council’s apparent legitimacy enabled it to interact with diplomatic missions, federal ministries, agencies, lawmakers and private organisations, all under the impression that it had official government backing.
Meanwhile, fresh allegations have emerged over how the council eventually secured funding in the 2026 national budget.
A source within the National Assembly alleged that the ₦1.3 billion allocation did not pass through the conventional budget defence process but was instead incorporated into a broader package of submissions reportedly transmitted from the Presidency.
“The allocation wasn’t introduced as an independent request that lawmakers could interrogate,” the source said. “It was included alongside other presidential budget items, effectively bypassing the normal process of committee examination and public defence.”
The source added that Senate leaders are expected to respond publicly to the growing controversy when lawmakers reconvene, amid increasing calls for transparency over the budget approval process and questions about whether established oversight procedures were adequately followed.
As of the time of filing this report, neither the Senate leadership nor the Presidency had issued an official response to the allegations. The claims remain subject to official investigation and verification.
Post a Comment