Fresh questions have emerged over the Presidency’s explanation surrounding Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew and the alleged existence of a non-existent government agency, as Nigerians continue to scrutinise claims that forged appointment documents were used to operate under the name of the Federal Government.
The Presidency, through a statement issued by presidential spokesman Bayo Onanuga, maintained that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu never appointed Adeyemi to head either the so-called Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council or the Presidential Economic Advisory Council. It also stated that the Office of the Chief of Staff had reported the matter to security agencies after discovering what it described as forged presidential documents allegedly used to impersonate a government official.
According to information available to Brandspur Politics, investigations by the Nigeria Police reportedly uncovered forged appointment letters, multiple bank accounts linked to the alleged fictitious organisations and attempts to obtain official privileges under false pretences. The government said Adeyemi has since been arraigned before the Federal High Court on charges including forgery, impersonation and obtaining by false pretence, while insisting the matter is now before the courts.
The controversy intensified after Adeyemi accused the President’s Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila, of demanding hundreds of millions of naira to facilitate his appointment and secure access to the agency’s proposed take-off funding. Gbajabiamila has denied the allegations.
Despite the Presidency’s clarification, many Nigerians on social media questioned how an organisation described as fictitious allegedly operated from the Federal Secretariat, interacted with senior public officials, maintained bank accounts and reportedly appeared in federal budget documents if it had never been legally established.
The reported inclusion of the council in the 2026 federal budget has become a major point of public debate, with many calling for a detailed explanation of how an agency allegedly identified as fraudulent could feature in official government records and whether any public funds were allocated or released.
Human rights lawyer Femi Falana also weighed in on the matter, arguing that the Presidency does not possess the constitutional authority to exonerate individuals facing allegations of corruption or fraud. He maintained that such claims should be investigated by the Police and anti-corruption agencies, while also urging the government to explain reports that billions of naira were budgeted for an agency whose legitimacy is now being disputed.
With criminal proceedings underway and public scrutiny mounting, the controversy has shifted beyond the allegations against Adeyemi to wider concerns about internal verification systems, budget oversight and accountability within Nigeria’s public institutions.
