Adeniyi Adeyemi, the self-appointed Director-General of the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council, has asked the House of Representatives committee investigating the council to allow his lawyers and journalists to be present when he appears for questioning.
Adeyemi, who is currently in police custody, is expected to appear before the ad hoc committee this week as lawmakers continue their investigation into how the PFIPC allegedly obtained government office space in Abuja and received more than N1.32bn in the 2026 national budget despite questions over its legal status.
The committee, led by Yusuf Gagdi, has not yet settled on a venue for Adeyemi’s appearance. A source familiar with the proceedings confirmed that no final decision had been made as of Sunday.
The planned questioning follows appearances by several senior government officials before the committee. Those who have testified include the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Didi Walson-Jack, Budget Office Director-General Tanimu Yakubu, Central Bank of Nigeria Director of Banking Services Hamisu Abdullahi and representatives of the Inspector-General of Police.
Their testimonies have raised questions about how Adeyemi was able to present himself as the head of the PFIPC and gain access to government institutions and processes.
Adeyemi had earlier declined to answer questions from the lawmakers when they visited him in police custody because his legal representatives were not present. The committee later moved the planned interrogation to Monday.
His family has also insisted that he is ready to answer questions but wants his lawyers present during the process. Adeyemi has further requested that journalists be allowed to cover the session, arguing that other people involved in the matter have already made their claims publicly.
The police have indicated that members of the committee can have access to Adeyemi if they meet the required conditions for visiting a person in custody.
Meanwhile, the Coalition of United Political Parties has called for a wider investigation into the PFIPC controversy.
The group rejected the reported findings of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, which cleared the Presidency of wrongdoing while indicting Adeyemi.
CUPP spokesperson Agu Bryan questioned how an organisation alleged to have no legal foundation could secure office accommodation, feature in the national budget, recruit workers and gain access to government activities without the involvement or knowledge of officials in relevant institutions.
The coalition called for the roles of agencies and offices linked to the council’s activities to be examined, including the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, the Central Bank of Nigeria, the Office of the Head of the Civil Service and the Ministry of Budget and National Planning.
CUPP also questioned how more than N1.32bn was included in the 2026 budget for an organisation whose legal status was allegedly not established.
The group further raised concerns over the alleged forgery of a signature attributed to the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila. It said investigators should determine whether other documents and official communications linked to Adeyemi were also allegedly forged.
The House committee is investigating several allegations connected to the PFIPC, including impersonation, forgery, financial irregularities and the alleged use of government facilities and official symbols.
The committee had earlier said it would question Adeyemi at a location yet to be disclosed because he remains in police custody under a court order. Gagdi said lawmakers would not interfere with the ongoing police, EFCC and ICPC investigations or breach the authority of the judiciary.
Adeyemi’s lawyers have objected to a closed-door interrogation and asked that he be given an opportunity to respond publicly to the allegations against him.
The committee is expected to question him as it seeks to establish how the PFIPC came into existence, how it gained access to government structures, who recognised it and how public funds were approved for its activities.