Fresh controversy has continued to trail the alleged #GbajabiamilaGate scandal, with increasing calls for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to personally address what critics describe as numerous unanswered questions surrounding the alleged Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC).
The latest pressure came from the Atiku Media Office, which, in a statement issued in Abuja on Wednesday, accused the Federal Government of failing to provide satisfactory explanations over the controversy despite the Presidency’s denial of any connection with the alleged agency.
The Presidency, through presidential spokesman Bayo Onanuga, had described Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew and the PFIPC as fraudulent, insisting that the council was not a recognised Federal Government agency.
However, the Atiku Media Office argued that the explanation raised more questions than answers, insisting that an independent investigation should be launched into the matter.
According to the statement, Nigerians deserve to know how an organisation described as fictitious allegedly operated openly from the Federal Secretariat, reportedly interacted with senior government officials, diplomats, traditional rulers and investors without attracting official scrutiny.
The opposition also questioned how the alleged agency reportedly secured a budget code and an allocation of about ₦1.3 billion in the 2026 Appropriation Act if it never legally existed.
It further argued that if official correspondence reportedly existed between the agency and both chambers of the National Assembly, the claim that the organisation never existed requires further clarification.
The statement also renewed allegations involving the President’s Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila, insisting that only a transparent public investigation could determine the roles of everyone connected to the controversy.
The Atiku Media Office further maintained that the Presidency did not address allegations that Prince Adeyemi claimed to have paid a ₦400 million bribe in connection with appointments.
It also referenced the death of Dolapo Babatunde Tanimola, described as an alleged intermediary in the matter, calling for a comprehensive investigation into the circumstances surrounding his death.
Beyond the opposition’s statement, many Nigerians have also continued to raise several questions they believe require direct answers from the Presidency.
Among the questions frequently raised are who inserted the alleged agency into the 2026 budget?
Who defended the budget before the National Assembly? Which committees approved the allocation?
Other unanswered questions are: Who advised the President to sign the budget?
Who allegedly authorised any Central Bank account linked to the agency?
Who approved its reported staff strength and salaries, and who allocated office space for its operations at the Federal Secretariat?
Former Sports Minister Solomon Dalung also questioned how an allegedly fake council could reportedly obtain office accommodation, recruit staff, interact with diplomats and appear in the national budget without official knowledge.
Dalung equally called on the Presidency to release documentary evidence explaining how the agency allegedly entered the budget process and operated within government facilities if it was indeed fictitious.
The growing controversy has fuelled fresh demands from opposition figures and concerned citizens for a judicial and forensic investigation into the matter before the 2027 general elections.
Many Nigerians are now urging President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to directly address the numerous questions surrounding the alleged PFIPC controversy, saying only a transparent explanation and an independent investigation can restore public confidence and lay lingering doubts to rest.
