PFIPC Scandal: Gbajabiamila’s Signatures to 9 Agencies Genuine, Only One Letter Had Different Signature – Hon. Rep Gadgi

PFIPC Scandal: Gbajabiamila’s Signatures to Nine Agencies Genuine, Only Fake DG Appointment Letter Had Different Signature – Hon. Rep Gadgi

The Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Defence, Yusuf Gadgi, has stated that the signatures of the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, on letters sent to nine government agencies were authentic, except for the one used to appoint the alleged Director-General of the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC).

Speaking during an investigative hearing by the House of Representatives into the alleged fraudulent agency and the appointment of Adeyemi Adeniyi as its purported Director-General, Gadgi said the committee compared multiple official correspondences from the Office of the Chief of Staff.

According to him, letters addressed to the National Security Adviser, the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Department of State Services (DSS), the Nigeria Police Force, and other government institutions all bore consistent signatures.

However, he said the signature on the letter appointing Adeniyi as PFIPC Director-General was different from the others.

“Letters written by the Office of the Chief of Staff to the National Security Adviser, to Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Office of the Head of the Federal Civil Service, to Ministry of Foreign Affairs, to DG of DSS, to the Nigeria Police; nine different letters from the Chief of Staff to the President… the only signature that differs is the signature that appointed the fake DG,” Gadgi said.

The revelation strengthens the House’s ongoing investigation into the PFIPC controversy, which centres on allegations that the council operated without lawful establishment and that official documents may have been forged to facilitate the appointment of its purported leadership.

The investigative panel is expected to continue its probe to determine those responsible for the alleged forgery and any breaches of public trust.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top