Prince Adeyemi alleges payment for federal appointment, kickback demand over ₦27.4bn take-off grant; Presidency denies agency’s existence
By Baron Eloagu
ABUJA, Nigeria — June 29, 2026
Fresh allegations of corruption, abuse of office and administrative irregularities have placed the Presidency under intense public scrutiny after Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew accused senior officials of demanding huge sums of money in connection with his appointment to head a federal agency whose existence has itself become the subject of controversy.
At the centre of the dispute are claims that Adeyemi allegedly paid ₦400 million as part of a ₦600 million arrangement to secure his appointment and later rejected an alleged demand to surrender 48 per cent of a proposed take-off grant of ₦27.4 billion earmarked for the agency.
The allegations, which have not been independently verified by A1NEWS International, were made during a press conference held on June 25, 2026.
The Office of the Chief of Staff to the President, Rt. Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila, has previously denied any connection with the agency and maintained that the agency cited by Adeyemi does not exist.
The conflicting positions have raised questions about government documentation, budgetary processes and institutional accountability.
Contradictory Claims Over Agency’s Existence
According to Adeyemi, the disputed body—the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC)—is a legally recognized institution reflected in the 2026 Appropriation Act.
He claimed the agency has:
- Budgetary allocations in the 2026 Appropriation Act;
- Approved staffing strength of 314 officers;
- Office accommodation within the Federal Secretariat;
- Treasury Single Account and foreign currency accounts with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).
He argued that these institutional features contradict the Presidency’s position that the agency is non-existent.
“If the agency does not exist, how did it receive budgetary allocations and administrative approvals?” Adeyemi asked.
Allegations of Appointment Payments
During the press conference, Adeyemi alleged that he paid ₦400 million through an intermediary as part of a ₦600 million arrangement linked to his appointment.
He further alleged that disagreement later arose after he rejected an alleged request that nearly half of the agency’s proposed take-off grant be surrendered.
A1NEWS International has not independently verified these allegations.
No documentary evidence supporting the alleged payments was publicly presented during the briefing.
Chief of Staff Rejects Allegations
The Office of the Chief of Staff has categorically denied involvement in the disputed agency.
Earlier statements issued by the Presidency also distanced the Chief of Staff from both the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) and the Presidential Economic Advisory Council (PEAC).
The Presidency has maintained that the agency referenced by Adeyemi does not exist within the structure of the Federal Government.
Questions Raised Over Budgetary Process
Adeyemi questioned how an allegedly non-existent agency could appear in official government records.
He argued that if the agency is indeed fictitious, explanations would be required regarding:
- its reported inclusion in the 2026 Appropriation Act;
- alleged approvals by the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation;
- reported banking arrangements with the Central Bank of Nigeria; and
- alleged office allocation within the Federal Secretariat.
These claims remain unverified and require official clarification.
Calls for Independent Investigation
Adeyemi called on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to establish an independent investigative panel to examine:
- the existence or otherwise of the disputed agency;
- all relevant budgetary and administrative records;
- allegations surrounding his appointment;
- alleged financial demands connected to the appointment;
- the reported death of intermediary Babatunde Tanimola; and
- his claims of attempted attacks on his life.
He urged that the panel include representatives of civil society organisations and other independent stakeholders.
Need for Documentary Evidence
The controversy has shifted attention from political exchanges to documentary evidence.
Among the records that could help clarify the issues are:
- appointment letters;
- budget documents;
- payroll records;
- Central Bank account documentation;
- approvals from the Office of the Head of the Civil Service;
- correspondence relating to the establishment of the agency; and
- evidence supporting or refuting the alleged financial transactions.
Until such records are independently examined, many of the competing claims remain allegations.
The dispute has evolved beyond personal accusations into questions concerning public administration, transparency and accountability within the Federal Government.
While Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi insists documentary evidence will validate his claims, the Presidency maintains that the agency at the centre of the controversy does not exist.
Given the seriousness of the allegations—including alleged bribery, abuse of office and possible irregularities in government processes—the matter is likely to attract increased public and institutional scrutiny.
As of the time of filing this report, there has been no announcement of an independent investigation by the Federal Government.
A1NEWS International will continue to monitor developments and publish responses from all parties as they become available.
Leave a Reply