The House of Representatives has ordered an investigation into the alleged inclusion of a non-existent government agency, the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC), in the 2026 Appropriation Framework, amid claims that the body has no legal basis for its existence.
The House also set up an Ad-Hoc committee to unravel how the agency allegedly found its way into the federal budget despite lacking an Act of the National Assembly establishing it.
The resolution followed the adoption of a motion of urgent public importance moved by Yusuf Gagdi during at plenary.
Leading the debate on the motion, Mr. Gagdi said that records available to the National Assembly showed there was no law creating the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council, even though the organisation reportedly operated from the Federal Secretariat Complex in Abuja between November 2024 and October 2025 and dealt with several government institutions.
He noted that the Federal Government had since distanced itself from the council, while allegations of forgery and impersonation linked to the organisation are already before the Federal High Court in Abuja.
According to the lawmaker, the entity allegedly relied on documents claiming it was established under an Act codified as Chapter N2117 of the Laws of the Federation, despite no such legislation existing.
“The nearest existing law is the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission (NIPC) Act, which the purported council appeared to duplicate,” he said.
Mr. Gagdi said reports indicating that more than N1.3 billion connected to the entity had been captured in the 2026 budget framework raised serious questions about the integrity of the nation’s budget process.
He warned that the development exposed potential loopholes in budget preparation and legislative scrutiny, adding that it could point to the existence of other fictitious agencies within previous or current appropriation frameworks.
To establish how the alleged insertion occurred, the House constituted an ad hoc committee with a four-week mandate to trace the budget provision from the Executive’s proposal through the legislative process and determine the stage at which the disputed agency was introduced.
The committee is also expected to summon the Minister of Budget and Economic Planning and the Director-General of the Budget Office to explain the procedures used to verify new agencies before they are admitted into the national budget.
He also directed the panel to verify all Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) listed in the 2025 and 2026 appropriation frameworks against their respective legal instruments of establishment.
It is also expected to receive briefings from relevant security and anti-corruption agencies without interfering with the ongoing court proceedings.
The House also urged the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation to ensure that no funds are released or payment warrants honoured in favour of the disputed entity pending the conclusion of the investigation.
To prevent a recurrence, lawmakers resolved that the Budget Office should, from now on, submit alongside every Appropriation Bill a comprehensive list of all MDAs proposed for funding, clearly stating the legal instrument establishing each agency.
Credibility of Nigeria
Backing the motion, Chairman of the House Committee on National Security and Intelligence, Ahmed Satomi, described the development as a serious threat to the credibility of Nigeria’s budgeting process.
“This is a nationally important issue. We must investigate it thoroughly because it affects the sanctity of our budget process and the confidence Nigerians have in Parliament,” Satomi said.
The Deputy Speaker Benjamin Kalu also threw his weight behind the investigation, revealing that his office had unknowingly engaged officials of the purported council after receiving what appeared to be an authentic letter carrying the Presidency’s insignia.
Mr. Kalu said that the correspondence, dated 2 May 2025, bore the logos of both the Presidential Economic Advisory Council and the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council, while also listing an office address within the Federal Secretariat Complex and a government website.
He explained that his office carried out preliminary checks, confirmed that the organisation occupied the stated office and subsequently granted its officials an audience.
According to him, rather than discussing constitutional amendment and investment matters as outlined in their letter, the delegation appeared more interested in taking photographs.
“The experience shows that a letterhead bearing the Presidency or an office in the Federal Secretariat is no longer sufficient proof that an organisation is legally established,” Mr. Kalu said.
He stressed that Parliament must establish how the organisation gained access to key government institutions and allegedly secured a place in the national budget.
Following overwhelming support from members, Speaker Abbas Tajudeen put the motion to a voice vote, and it was unanimously adopted, clearing the way for the investigation.
