The National Security Adviser (NSA), Nuhu Ribadu, and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Bianca Odumegwu-Ojukwu, are expected to appear before the House of Representatives Ad Hoc Committee investigating the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC).
Ribadu is scheduled to appear before the committee at noon to explain the steps taken by his office after it was established that the PFIPC was not a recognised government institution.
Odumegwu-Ojukwu is also expected to provide further clarification on issues arising from submissions made by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to the committee.
The lawmakers’ decision to summon the NSA and the minister followed revelations made by the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Dunoma Ahmed, who appeared before the committee chaired by Hon. Yusuf Gagdi on Tuesday.
Ahmed, who represented the minister, told the lawmakers that the ministry had never officially dealt with the purported council or its alleged Director-General, Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi.
He said security authorities had also confirmed that Adeyemi was unknown to the Federal Government.
According to the permanent secretary, the ministry wrote to the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) on October 16, 2025, seeking clarification on Adeyemi’s claim to be the Director-General of the PFIPC.
Ahmed said the ONSA responded on November 26, 2025, stating that enquiries made with the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation and the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President established that Adeyemi was unknown to the Federal Government.
He explained that the ministry had rejected three requests from the purported council following due diligence, citing inconsistencies and discrepancies in correspondence from Adeyemi and concerns over the legitimacy of both the organisation and its alleged leadership.
Reacting to the disclosure, Gagdi expressed concern that the ONSA had established as far back as November 2025 that the purported PFIPC and its alleged director-general were not recognised by the Federal Government.
The committee chairman questioned what action had been taken by the country’s security architecture after the discovery.
Gagdi said the NSA’s appearance was necessary to determine the steps taken by his office after the Ministry of Foreign Affairs raised concerns about the authenticity of the organisation.
He said the committee needed to establish whether appropriate measures had been taken to prevent the alleged organisation from continuing its activities.
The lawmaker said, “The NSA responded that it is an illegal agency. What did the Office of the National Security Adviser do as a security institution after that discovery? If it had discovered that the agency did not exist, appropriate action ought to have been taken. They should come before this Committee and explain the actions they have taken.”
Meanwhile, the committee expressed disappointment over the failure of some Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) to honour its invitations.
The panel specifically criticised the absence of the Minister of Finance, who was represented by a ministry official, insisting that invited officials must appear personally before the committee or face further legislative action.
The committee described the failure of MDAs to honour its invitations as an affront to the constitutional oversight powers of the House of Representatives.
It reminded government agencies that invitations issued by a duly constituted committee of the National Assembly are backed by the constitutional powers vested in the legislature under Sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.
The panel therefore issued a final notice to all defaulting MDAs, directing them to appear before it with relevant officials and documents requested in previous correspondence.
It warned that any agency that failed to appear without lawful justification could face sanctions as permitted by law.
The committee stressed that the investigation was in the national interest and was not targeted at any individual or institution.
It said the probe was aimed at establishing the facts, protecting the integrity of public administration, upholding the rule of law and ensuring that no public office or institution operated outside the Constitution and laws of Nigeria.
The House of Representatives had constituted the Ad Hoc Committee to investigate how the controversial PFIPC was included in the 2026 Appropriation framework, despite questions surrounding its legitimacy and status as a government institution.
