I, Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew, note that serious public questions have arisen concerning the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council, PFIPC, and the Presidential Economic Advisory Council, PEAC. Those questions, in my respectful view, require clarity, accountability, and independent verification.
Let me state my position with precision and without equivocation.
I reject any attempt to characterize me as a fraudulent actor absent a full, fair, and independent examination of the relevant facts, records, and communications. My position is not grounded in sentiment, speculation, or public dramatization. It is grounded in the elementary principle that allegations, disclaimers, and competing narratives must be tested against documentary evidence and subjected to due process.
On 11 June 2026, Rt. Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila, in his capacity as Chief of Staff to the President, issued a public disclaimer distancing the Office of the Chief of Staff from PFIPC and PEAC. Following that disclaimer, my name was drawn into the controversy that ensued.
My response is straightforward: a matter of this gravity cannot properly be disposed of by denial alone. Where there are apparent contradictions in public records, administrative processes, and institutional conduct, those contradictions must be examined through an independent, credible, and transparent process.
It has been asserted that the agency in question does not exist. If that assertion is correct, then serious and unavoidable procedural questions arise as to how the name of that agency reportedly appeared in the 2026 Appropriation Budget, specifically at pages 50 and 51, which I have cited as relevant material. If a non-existent agency was in fact included in an official budget document, then it becomes necessary to determine when that reference entered the budgetary process, by whose authority it was retained, and how it survived the various stages of executive preparation and legislative scrutiny.
This is not merely a political controversy. It is, fundamentally, a question of public administration, institutional integrity, and governmental accountability.
The national budget does not emerge casually, informally, or in isolation. It is the product of multiple stages of drafting, review, coordination, validation, and approval. It passes through technical officers, relevant ministries, the Budget Office, executive review structures, and the National Assembly. It is therefore legitimate to ask: at what stage did references to the agency allegedly enter the official record, and on what basis were they preserved throughout that process?
Further, questions have been raised as to whether the same agency allegedly operated banking arrangements, including domiciliary accounts, a pounds account, and a Treasury Single Account with the Central Bank of Nigeria, and whether the opening or operation of such accounts was supported by corresponding official documentation originating from relevant public institutions, including the Office of the Accountant General of the Federation. If these reports are inaccurate, the responsible authorities should say so clearly and categorically. If they are accurate, then the public is entitled to a full explanation.
Questions have also been raised regarding whether the agency was allocated office space at the Federal Secretariat and whether personnel were approved to it through the proper civil service process. These are matters capable of objective verification. If they are unfounded, the public record should be corrected. If they are well-founded, they warrant serious institutional scrutiny.
I must also address the effort, whether direct or indirect, to portray me as the principal wrongdoer in this matter. I reject that portrayal unequivocally. It is false, gravely injurious to my reputation, and unsupported by any fair or lawful adjudicative process. I maintain that my conduct has been lawful, and I remain ready, willing, and able to cooperate fully with any lawful and independent inquiry.
For the avoidance of doubt, I also consider it necessary to place on record certain serious allegations which, in my view, require urgent, impartial, and evidence-based investigation.
I allege that the principal disagreement between myself and the Chief of Staff arose from an alleged request for 48% of the take-off grant, said to be connected to the same agency whose existence is now being denied. I further allege that a total sum of ₦400 million was collected by proxy, with a remaining balance of ₦200 million allegedly tied to the arrangement under which the appointment was to be secured. These are grave allegations. I do not invite the public to treat them as established fact merely because I have stated them. On the contrary, I expressly contend that they should be subjected to immediate, independent, and forensic verification through a lawful investigative process.
In addition, I am aware of allegations from multiple sources suggesting a broader pattern in which access to appointments, official facilitation, or entry into certain government structures may have been influenced through unofficial or monetized channels, only for such arrangements to later be disowned when controversy arises. I am likewise aware of allegations that persons who attempt to object to or report such conduct may face intimidation, pressure, or other forms of retaliation. These allegations are serious. If they are unfounded, a proper inquiry should say so. If they are substantiated, the implications for public confidence in government are profound.
There have also been allegations that security institutions may have been considered or encouraged for use in a manner designed to recast my lawful diplomatic engagements as espionage, disloyalty, or other misconduct. I categorically reject any attempt to criminalize lawful conduct, distort legitimate activity, or weaponize public institutions against me outside the bounds of evidence, law, and due process.
For these reasons, I state clearly that silence cannot resolve this matter; only truth established through due process can do so.
Also Read: Probe Gbajabiamila now, Atiku counsels Tinubu
Accordingly, I respectfully call on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR, to constitute an independent investigative panel with a clear mandate to examine the issues arising from this matter. In my view, such a panel should be empowered to:
1. Investigate the death of Mr. Babatunde Tanimola, whom I understand to have acted as an intermediary between myself and the Chief of Staff, and whose death was reportedly described by the police as resulting from a fire incident at a hotel in Utako, Abuja, on 22 October 2025.
2. Investigate the alleged attempts on my life, particularly the incident of 7 September 2025 along the Abuja-Kaduna Expressway, during which I narrowly escaped and certain personal effects, documents, and two phones containing important information were reportedly taken.
3. Review all relevant official documents, approvals, correspondence, and communication trails connected to the agency in question, including budgetary references, administrative records, staffing approvals, and banking documentation.
4. Invite and question all relevant public officials, institutions, and actors connected to the preparation, recognition, funding, administration, and oversight of the agency.
5. Publish its findings transparently and in full, so that the Nigerian people may know the truth and confidence in public institutions may be preserved.
Given the seriousness of the matters in issue, I further contend that any official whose office is central to the subject matter of the inquiry should consider stepping aside for the duration of that process, in order to safeguard the credibility, independence, and integrity of the investigation.
In my respectful view, such a panel should include credible representatives of civil society and other independent observers capable of reinforcing public confidence in the fairness, objectivity, and completeness of the inquiry.
Let me also be clear about what I am, and am not, asking for.
I am not asking that anyone be condemned in the court of public opinion. I am not asking that any person be presumed guilty without due process. I am asking for the opposite: that the relevant facts be tested, the relevant records examined, the relevant communications scrutinized, and the truth established through lawful, independent, and transparent means.
If I am wrong, let an independent process so determine. If those I have challenged are correct, let that same process confirm it.
To the media, civil society, religious leaders, and traditional institutions: your role in moments such as this is essential. Public accountability depends on courage, fairness, discipline, and fidelity to verifiable fact.
To the security agencies: I urge continued professionalism, restraint, and unwavering adherence to the Constitution and the law.
To the judiciary: I appeal for independence, impartiality, and courage in the discharge of your constitutional duty.
To Nigerians everywhere: I urge you to focus on facts, documents, institutions, and due process, and not on distraction, speculation, or intimidation.
I remain willing to cooperate fully with any lawful inquiry.
I will not accept falsehood as a substitute for investigation.
I will not accept intimidation as a substitute for accountability.
And I will not waive, compromise, or surrender my right to defend my name, reputation, and lawful interests through all constitutional and legal means available to me.
