0
…Reps Query OAGF Over Administrative Code Granted Agency
ABUJA – Tunji Disu, Inspector-General of Police (IGP), on Wednesday, explained that he could not produce the self-acclaimed Director-General of the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC), Prince Adeyemi Adeniyi, as requested by the House of Representatives because he remains in custody pursuant to a subsisting court remand order.
This is as the House of Representatives Ad-Hoc Committee investigating the activities of the PFIPC queried the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation (OAGF) over the administrative code granted to the organisation, as it uncovered what it described as a network of forged State House documents allegedly used to present the council as a legitimate government agency.
The committee, chaired by Hon. Yusuf Adamu Gagdi, raised concerns over the circumstances surrounding the issuance of the administrative code, saying preliminary findings indicated that the process may have been initiated with correspondence purportedly originating from offices within the State House that investigators found did not exist.
The committee received a letter from the Nigeria Police Force explaining why Adeniyi could not be produced before the panel despite an earlier invitation on Monday.
Representing the Nigeria Police Force, DCP Olufemi Akinola, informed the committee that the Police Force was constrained by the court order and would only be able to produce the suspect before the committee after the order had been vacated.
Reading the police position, the committee chairman, Hon. Yusuf Adamu Gagdi, clarified that Adeniyi did not refuse to appear before the committee.
“He did not refuse to appear before this committee. The police informed us that he remains in custody by virtue of a subsisting court order. We respect the principle of separation of powers and will not interfere with ongoing judicial proceedings,” he said.
The committee chairman added that lawmakers were mindful of ongoing investigations by the Nigeria Police Force, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC), the Department of State Services (DSS) and the Office of the National Security Adviser.
He stressed that the committee would not take any action capable of undermining the investigations of the relevant security and anti-corruption agencies.
Gagdi said the committee had made significant progress in its investigation, including the discovery of documents allegedly forged in the names of senior State House officials.
According to him, one of the major findings was the use of a purported Department of Administration and Support Services under the Office of the Permanent Secretary, State House, which investigators said was not part of the presidency’s structure.
“Our investigation has established that this department does not exist. Yet documents bearing that office were allegedly used to obtain official recognition and process government approvals,” Gagdi said.
He further disclosed that the committee had identified no fewer than 19 documents allegedly forged in the names of State House officials.
“It is not just one forged letter. We have uncovered 19 different documents purportedly emanating from the State House. These are serious discoveries,” he stated.
The lawmaker urged Nigerians not to politicise the investigation, insisting that the committee was guided by facts and documentary evidence.
“We should not be carried away by politics or sentiments. Let us follow the facts wherever they lead,” he added.
OAGF Explains Issuance Of Administrative Code
The committee subsequently questioned the role of the OAGF in granting the administrative code to the PFIPC. Appearing before the panel, Joshua Luka, former Director of the Federal Project Financial Department in the OAGF, explained that the request for the administrative code was conveyed through a letter addressed to the Permanent Secretary, State House.
Luka said the correspondence was processed in line with the administrative procedure applicable at the time, adding that the letter was copied to the Budget Office only as an advance notification pending confirmation from the State House.
He explained that the original correspondence was expected to reach the Permanent Secretary for authentication before any further administrative action could be taken.
Luka maintained that the OAGF followed the normal procedure and argued that the problem occurred because the letter did not eventually get to the appropriate office at the State House.
“The lapse was an individual one, not an institutional failure,” Luka said. He explained that he was outside the country on an official assignment in Tanzania with the Accountant-General of the Federation when the process was ongoing.
According to him, if the letter had reached the Permanent Secretary’s office, officials of the State House would have detected that the purported department referenced in the correspondence did not exist. The explanation, however, did not satisfy the committee.
Gagdi questioned how a letter addressed to the Permanent Secretary, State House, was eventually collected from the OAGF by Prince Adeyemi Adeniyi instead of officials authorised to receive correspondence on behalf of the presidency.
Displaying copies of the documents before the committee, the chairman argued that the alleged irregularity would have been detected earlier if the correspondence had followed the proper administrative channel.
“If the letter had reached the Permanent Secretary’s office, they would have informed you that there is no Department of Administration and Support Services in the State House.
That would have exposed the fraud much earlier,” Gagdi said. The hearing took another turn when an OAGF staff member confirmed that Adeniyi personally visited the office and collected the acknowledgement copy of the letter meant for the State House. Asked who collected the document, the official replied: “He came to our office himself and collected it.”
The disclosure prompted further questions from lawmakers, who wondered why correspondence addressed to the Permanent Secretary, State House, was released to an individual outside the presidency.
Gagdi said government institutions must strengthen their internal control mechanisms to prevent administrative procedures from being exploited by individuals seeking to create legitimacy for organisations through questionable documentation.
He disclosed that the committee had substantially concluded its public hearings and would continue engagements with relevant agencies through written correspondence before presenting its preliminary findings.
The committee is expected to present its preliminary findings next week before submitting a comprehensive report to the House of Representatives, as investigations continue into the alleged forgery of official government documents and the processes through which the PFIPC obtained administrative recognition.
