A former Governor of Borno state, Alimodu Sheriff has raised a scathing allegation against the 2027 ADC Presidential Candidate, Peter Obi , to the effect that the reason why he’s contesting the election, is primarily to divide the country.
“He (Obi) wanted to be president because he wants to divide Nigeria,” Sheriff said.
The former governor and Peoples Democratic Party, PDP Chairman claimed that Obi has refused to condemn the activities of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, the outlawed secessionist group, led by jailed Maxi Nnamdi Kanu, despite what he described as their atrocious attack against the country.
Sheriff spoke on Channels TV programme Politics Today, saying the north will not vote for the ADC presidential candidate because the region holds a grudge against him for chasing “all the northerners out” of Anambra state while he was the governor of the state.
The magazine reports that Sheriff’s claim was contrary to what actually happened when Obi was the helmsman of the south east state. He only sent street urchins and beggars, majorly from the northern parts of the country back to their states, after the state government accused them of constituting nuisance in the state.
But speaking, Sheriff disclosed that northerners are ready to punish the ADC presidential candidate for the act, by not voting for him, despite the fact that his running mate, Rabiu Kwankwaso is from the north.
He explained that Obi’s major aim is to “divide’ the country if he became Nigeria’s leader in 2027.
Speaking on the chances of Obi for the Presidency, the former Borno state governor said he’s not a major contender for the office.
“I am not worried about Peter Obi at all because I know the northerners will never vote for Peter Obi. They have known better now. This situation is different now. You know why? he said.
The former Anambra state governor received significant votes from the region during the 2023 presidential election, particularly in the North Central where he trounced Tinubu.
Not a few in the political circles insist that Obi is a strong contender against the incumbent President Bola Ahmed Tinubu who’s also eyeing to return to Aso Rock, Nigeria’s Presidency, aside Atiku Abubakar, the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress, ADC .
Sheriff details Obi’s sin against the north and why people form the region are unlikely to vote for him.
“Peter Obi, when he was the governor, he chased all the northerners out of Anambra State. Because this is what Kano people are telling Kwankwaso now. That we always supported you (Kwankwaso). And we will support you if you run for president. But we will not support you to vote for Peter Obi,” he said.
It is clear, even to the deaf, that Mr Peter Obi is the most popular Nigerian today. His popularity was gradual, sustained, and is today absolute. It was nurtured by his remarkable life, his service as Governor of Anambra State, and the steady revelation of his character. As governor, he was distinct from his peers – conscientiously absorbed in the enterprise of governance and devoted, almost recklessly, to the welfare of the people. There are so many positive things to say about Obi that a quire of paper could not contain his praises.
In appearance and manners, he is calm, reserved, and soft-spoken. His friends know him as a man of immense personal warmth and charm. In politics, however, he is an able and energetic campaigner possesses an iron will, and maintains a fierce determination to win every contest without resorting to rigging.
More than many contemporary politicians, he has cultivated a tranquillity born of self-control. He rarely replies to the insults hurled by the Umahi tribe, choosing instead to deal with ideas rather than personalities. It is this rare combination of a restrained temperament and firm conviction that has endeared him to millions of Nigerians.
Peter Obi towers above a thousand Umahis; he is the sun in whose presence a million stars lose their scintillating brilliance. A century after Epicurus, Cicero asked, “Why are there so many followers of Epicurus?” Today, Nigerians ask the same question about Obi many years after he served as the governor of Anambra State. The answer is simple: a nation exhausted by failure naturally gravitates towards a man who exacts as hard a discipline from himself as he expects from others.
It is precisely this gravity that makes him the most attacked politician in Nigeria today. Popularity inevitably attracts hostility. Every political figure who succeeds in capturing the collective imagination of the people concurrently activates those whose fortunes depend on diminishing him. To understand the relentless attacks against Obi, one must understand the distinct quarters from which they come, each driven by its own leadership and underlying motives.
These attacks are symptomatic of a deeper systemic crisis. Our national leadership, with only a few honourable exceptions, has failed Nigeria because we have repeatedly failed to choose men of character to govern our affairs. Consequently, our politics has degenerated into a procession of corruption, indiscipline, incompetence, and shameless philistinism. Today, the occupant of the centre governs Nigeria with devoted incompetence. It is against this grim background – where our country is passing through one of the darkest periods in its history – that the desperate crusade to diminish Obi must be understood.
However, there is a distinct line between institutional political warfare and personal malice. This is where a contrast can be drawn with figures like Engr. Joe Igbokwe. Joe’s primary interest is partisan: ensuring that his party remains in power. Consequently, he targets institutions, regions, or political movements that he considers existential threats to his party’s survival. Yet, you will not find him descending into sustained, venomous personal attacks on Obi. There is a fundamental difference between opposing a political tendency and making the destruction of an individual the centerpiece of one’s politics.
Another group is represented by Mr Joel Chukwuma Kpontus Okafor. He is called Mr Kpontus because of the sexual perversion that reportedly led to his rustication from All Hallows Seminary, and two other seminaries thereafter. He represents those whom one may safely describe as “mumus” – the unthinking sycophants. They neither reason nor interrogate facts. Abuse is their argument; insults are their evidence. They merely parrot whatever serves their immediate purpose.
Then we have the governors. Most South-East governors routinely make extravagant and often dishonest assertions in praise of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu (PBAT), leaving one to wonder whether they truly place the welfare of their people above political convenience. You will rarely see them presenting the problems of the South-East as a unified, common front. The other day, Senator Victor Umeh, the lion himself, was fighting single-handedly against the marginalisation of the Igbos. One would have expected our governors to rally around him, sit down with him, and provide him with more ammunition to fire on; instead, they preferred a state of comfortable complacency. Yet, many of these governors possess sufficient maturity not to make Obi the object of personal abuse. They oppose him politically without descending into character assassination. Even the Governor of Ebonyi State, the scion of Umahi, has generally avoided making the contest personal, as some do. They know themselves.
The most significant faction, however, is the one led by Engr. Dave Umahi. Unlike the others, this group appears to believe that Obi must not merely be opposed; he must be politically annihilated – they demand a knockout blow. Every opportunity becomes an occasion to diminish his achievements, question his integrity, or weaken his appeal before the public.
Engr. Dave Umahi is the former Governor of Ebonyi State and the current Minister of Works. Few Nigerian politicians display such acute sensitivity to another politician’s popularity as he does towards Obi. He appears deeply troubled by Obi’s growing acceptance and seems determined to seize every opportunity to undermine it. Umahi has become notorious for his habitual truculence in controversy. His personality, alas, appears wholly ungovernable. He is painfully sensitive to criticism and bears opposition with little patience, as though disagreement itself were an offence. He seldom entertains the possibility that he might be wrong. Such traits naturally provoke strong antipathy from those who encounter him.
His public language towards Obi has often been unusually harsh. Rather than engaging with Obi’s arguments, he frequently resorts to sweeping denunciations and invectives, giving the impression that he is confronting an existential enemy rather than a political opponent. This hostility did not begin today. In 2019, when Alhaji Atiku Abubakar selected Obi as his running mate, Umahi stood prominently among those who vehemently opposed the choice. Even members of his administration who openly identified with Obi found themselves under immense pressure. His Chief Press Secretary at the time, who happens to be a personal friend of mine, faced severe victimisation and hardship for daring to show support.
I recall accompanying Obi on a visit to Umahi in Abakaliki in 2019. At one point, Obi asked me to bring a bag from his vehicle, which he presented to Umahi. As Umahi escorted us out, he aggressively impressed upon Obi the need to extend similar bags to a list of names he mentioned. Watching that scene play out, I completely wrote him off from that day forward.
As we drove away, I remarked to Obi that I had expected South-East governors, particularly those within the same political family, to support his vice-presidential aspiration through concrete, collaborative efforts rather than looking for bags whose content I am sure ended in their houses.
Anyone who carefully observes Umahi’s public appearances cannot fail to notice the burdened, agitated manner in which he often speaks. One could see it from the twitching of his cheek muscles. His interviews frequently contain glaring contradictions, due quota of nonsense, exaggerations, and statements that are incredibly difficult to reconcile. One is often left wondering whether raw passion has completely overtaken rational reflection.
Valentine Obienyem
Recently, he challenged Obi to a public debate. Someone should gently remind him that he has yet to conclude the debate he earlier proposed with Barrister Nyesom Wike. Those two men – coin of the same mould- appear to operate on the exact same wavelength and would undoubtedly understand each other much better.
Ultimately, public life rewards neither loudness nor invective. It rewards character, consistency, and credibility. These are qualities that cannot be manufactured by propaganda, nor can they be destroyed by abuse. They are earned over time through steadfast conduct. It is on that ground that every public figure, including Peter Obi, Dave Umahi, and indeed every aspirant to leadership, must ultimately be judged.
Shall we recapitulate the latest major scandal amongst many in which he has emerged? In early 2026, a major controversy erupted when businesswoman and supplier Mrs Tracyniter (Tracy) Ohiri publicly accused the Minister of Works, Dave Umahi, of outstanding debts totaling over ₦200 million for campaign promotional materials she allegedly supplied during his 2014 gubernatorial bid. Alongside the financial claim, Ohiri levelled explosive allegations of sexual harassment, claiming that during a business trip to Ebonyi State, Umahi had improperly entered her hotel room wearing only a towel and demanded sexual favours in exchange for settling his debt. Though Umahi fiercely denied the allegations, the sordid affair remains a testament to the turbulent, ungovernable nature of his character and track record.
This sordid affair, much like his erratic political maneuvering, underscores why Umahi remains the ideological antithesis of the movement Peter Obi represents. While one man relies on the volatile instruments of intimidation, transactional loyalty, and sudden outbursts, the other remains anchored in the steady, unyielding currency of public trust. In the final analysis, history is a patient judge. Long after the echoes of forced invectives have faded and the concrete monuments have begun to weather, it is character, dignity, and a genuine reverence for the people that will endure. Dave Umahi may continue his desperate quest for a political knockout blow, but he will soon find that you cannot annihilate an idea whose time has come.
Following his resignation from one of Nigeria’s biggest financial services companies, United Bank for Africa (UBA), stakeholders are asking: What’s next for Tony Elumelu, one of Africa’s most astute bankers?
Elumelu spent 12 years superintending the affairs of the bank as its board chairman. However, on Monday, the commercial bank announced that he was exiting the non-executive position. The bank has since announced Emmanuel Nnorom as his replacement.
In a statement issued on Monday by the bank’s Group Head of Marketing and Corporate Communications, UBA, Alero Ladipo, the lender stated that the board had elected Nnorom, a Non-Executive Director, as Elumelu’s successor. It said Elumelu will exit the bank on August 21, 2026.
The bank stated that the decision to leave the commercial bank was taken at a board meeting held on Sunday, saying Nnorom will take charge from the same date.
The statement read: “UBA Plc has announced that Mr. Tony O. Elumelu, Group Chairman of UBA, will retire from the Board of Directors of UBA on 21 August 2026, upon the completion of the 12-year tenure limit prescribed for Non-Executive Directors of Banks by the Central Bank of Nigeria.
“At its meeting held on 6 July 2026, the Board accepted Mr. Elumelu’s retirement and elected Mr. Emmanuel N. Nnorom, a Non-Executive Director of the Bank, as his successor, with effect from 21 August 2026.
“The Board places on record its profound appreciation to Mr. Elumelu for his visionary leadership and exceptional contribution to the strategic vision and institutional strength of the UBA Group.”
Speaking on his retirement, Elumelu said the commercial bank had experienced tremendous transformation under his watch, rising from just a few branches in Nigeria to operating in 20 countries across the continent, with over 50 million customers.
He also expressed confidence in his successor’s ability to take the financial giant to a new level, describing him as “a leader of integrity, experience and sound judgement,” and saying the lender would “thrive under his leadership.”
“Emmanuel Nnorom is a leader of integrity, experience and sound judgement, and I am confident that the Bank will continue to thrive under his leadership,” Elumelu said.
Following his retirement, those close to the financial guru said Elumelu is not slowing down, as he will continue to play active roles in other companies where he has interests, especially Heirs Holdings, his family-owned investment business, with significant shareholdings in companies such as Heirs Holdings Limited and Heirs Holdings Capital Limited. The two companies hold over 20 percent of UBA, making them the bank’s largest shareholder, even though the bank is publicly owned.
His exit from UBA will also allow him to focus on other companies, including Transcorp Power, one of Nigeria’s largest electricity companies, operating in Ughelli, Delta State. Elumelu is the Chairman of Transnational Corporation, the parent company under which TransAfam Power Limited, operator of the TransAfam Power Plant in Rivers State, operates.
Meanwhile, insiders informed the magazine that UBA will continue to operate under Elumelu’s shadow despite his official exit from the commercial bank.
“Elumelu will continue to influence the bank through trusted associates, as well as business and family allies whom he has groomed over the years. The image of Elumelu looms large in the commercial bank, which, under his leadership, has grown into one of Africa’s largest financial institutions,” a stakeholder told the magazine.
A few factual points should also be verified before publication—for example, the ownership percentage of Heirs Holdings in UBA (“over 210 percent” appears to be a typographical error and has been rendered as “over 20 percent”), and the exact date of the board meeting.
The Federal Government has noted recent public commentary alleging that approximately two percent of GDP amounting to over ₦8 trillion was spent outside the approved budget based on references to the IMF Representative in Nigeria and the Fund’s 2026 Article IV Consultation Report. These claims are incorrect and risk misleading the public regarding the government’s financial management.
For the avoidance of doubt, the Federal Government does not operate a “shadow budget” or expend public funds outside the constitutional and statutory framework established for public finance.
Under Sections 80 – 83 and 162 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), public funds may only be withdrawn and expended in accordance with the Constitution and laws enacted by the National Assembly. Accordingly, Federal Government expenditure is incurred pursuant to duly enacted Appropriation Acts, Supplementary Appropriation Acts, and other statutory authorities enacted by the National Assembly. In addition, multi-year capital projects which necessarily span multiple budgets are implemented in accordance with extant laws and approved provisions for capital rollovers where applicable. These are recognised features of public financial management and should not be misconstrued as expenditures outside the budget.
It is inaccurate to suggest that trillions of naira have been secretly spent outside legislative approval. Such allegations should have identified the specific projects purportedly executed without appropriation or legal authority and present credible evidence in support of the claim. To be meaningful, assertions of this magnitude must be supported by verifiable facts rather than conjecture.
For the purpose of public education, it is important to distinguish between appropriation, expenditure authorisation, financing, and fiscal reporting.
Nigeria’s public finance framework contains several statutory transfers, first-line charges and intervention mechanisms established by Acts of the National Assembly. These include, among others:
– Statutory allocations and contributions to development commissions and other agencies created by law.
– Cost of collection and cost of administration retained by designated revenue-collecting agencies as expressly provided under relevant legislation.
– Capital expenditure approved in separate budgets for some agencies and the Federal Capital Territory by the National Assembly.
– Special interventions approved by law to address national priorities such as security, infrastructure, disaster response, and other strategic national programmes or emergencies.
– Debt service obligations and other statutory transfers that are authorised under applicable legislation.
These expenditures are neither secret nor illegal. They are established by law, disclosed in various fiscal reports, and subject to applicable oversight, audit and accountability mechanisms. Their treatment for reporting purposes may differ from their presentation in the annual Appropriation Act, particularly under international statistical and reporting standards adopted by the Federal Government. Such classification differences should not be misrepresented as evidence of unlawful expenditure.
It is equally incorrect to suggest that the reported amount represents an increase in budget deficit. A fiscal deficit is determined by the relationship between total government revenues and total government expenditures. Whether a capital project is financed through annual appropriations, supplementary appropriations, statutory transfers, approved intervention mechanisms, or other lawful financing arrangements does not, by itself, increase the fiscal deficit.
Indeed, the IMF’s observation relates primarily to the comprehensiveness, timing and presentation of fiscal reporting rather than the legality of expenditure. Like many countries, Nigeria continues to strengthen the alignment between budget presentation and international fiscal reporting standards as part of ongoing public financial management reforms. As a matter of fact, His Excellency, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR had himself formally requested the National Assembly to end the practice of running multiple and overlapping budgets, and rather harmonise into a single, cohesive framework during his presentation of the 2026 Appropriation Bill to a joint session of the National Assembly on December 19, 2025.
The Federal Government remains firmly committed to prudent fiscal management, transparency and accountability. Recent reforms have significantly strengthened public financial management with ongoing improvements in budget assumptions and credibility, transparent revenue administration, digitalisation of government financial processes, and stronger treasury management. These reforms have been acknowledged by the IMF itself and other multilateral institutions, as well as international credit rating agencies, major media organisations and investors.
Public debate is both welcome and essential in a democratic society. However, it should be based on facts and an accurate understanding of Nigeria’s constitutional and fiscal framework. Mischaracterising technical observations as evidence of unlawful expenditure neither advances informed public discourse nor strengthens democratic accountability.
The Federal Government will continue to uphold the rule of law, maintain transparency in the management of public resources, and work with the National Assembly, oversight institutions, development partners and the Nigerian people to further strengthen fiscal governance in line with international best practices.
Oyedele is the Honourable Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy Federal Republic of Nigeria
A Federal Court sitting in Abuja on Monday ordered the African Democratic Congress, ADC, and its National Welfare Secretary Nkemakolam Ukandu, to pay the sum of N50 million each to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court Honourable Justice John Tsoho and Justice Peter Lifu over non-diligent prosecution of a motion on notice filed before the court.
The Source reports that Ukandu had, in the wake of the reassignment of the ADC leadership tussle case between the Senator David Mark-led national leadership, and eirstwhile Deputy National Chairman Nafiu Bala-Gombe from Honourable Justice Emeka Nwite, filed an application accusing the duo of the Chief Judge and Justice Lifu of being biased in matters relating to the Mark-led National Executive Committee, NEC of the opposition Coalition platform.
Consequently, the ADC and Ukandu, its National Welfare Secretary following the dismissal of its application for Justice Lifu to recuse himself from the case, filed a motion on notice before Justice Salim Ibrahim alleging bias, and compromised on the part of the duo of the Chief Judge and Justice Lifu in relation to cases involving the Senator Mark-led faction of the ADC.
Ukandu had in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1165/2026 prayed the court for an order compelling the National Judicial Council, NJC, to conduct an inquest into a series of allegations of corruption, bias and abuse of judicial powers leveled against Justices Tsoho and Lifu.
The plaintiff had faulted the Chief Judge for succumbing to the earlier demand by Bala-Gombe to reassign the party’s leadership tussle case to Justice Lifu despite protestations from the party.
The ADC National Welfare Secretary similarly accused Justice Lifu of manifest bias ,as well as willingness to do the biddings of individuals working against the ADC, following his refusal to join Ukandu as a party in the ongoing legal battle between Mark and Bala-Gombe.
However, following repeated failures of the plaintiff ,and his legal representatives to appear in court, presiding Judge , Justice Ibrahim on June 30, 2026 warned that he will be left with no other choice than to dismiss the motion on notice over the plaintiff’s failure to appear in court.
According to Justice Ibrahim, neither Ukandu nor his lawyer had bothered to appear before the court since officially instituting the case.
Consequently, while ruling on an oral application filed by J U K Igwe counsel to Justices Tsoho and Lifu on Monday , justice Ibrahim ordered the plaintiff to pay both defendants the sum of N 50 million each within the next 14 days.
He also struck out the suit for lack of diligent prosecution.
Practicing lawyers in Ogun state on Monday July 6, 2026, commenced a three-day boycott of Court proceedings, with judicial activities severely paralysis, and litigants stranded.
The source reports that the legal practitioners are embarking on the boycott exercise to register their displeasure with what they described as judicial policies inimical to their interests ,and practice.
Particularly, the lawyers are not comfortable with a new and obnoxious N100,000 fees being charged for virtual sittings, as well as the astronomical increase in the oath administration fee from N200 to N1,500.
The lawyers whose protests are being coordinated and enforced jointly by the Nigerian Bar Association NBA branches of Abeokuta ,Sagamu and Ota,are also angry with judicial authorities over what they perceive as undue restrictions place on lawyers in Ogun State.
The Abeokuta NBA chairman, Kayode Adeyemi who led the enforcement of the courts’ boycott in the capital city on Monday explained that the exercise is to drive home their unhappiness with certain policies introduced by the Ogun State Judiciary, which they view as being inimical to the interests of legal practitioners in the state.
“Some of the policies include: First, the payment of N100,000 virtual hearing fee. This means that any litigant who wishes to have a matter heard virtually must pay N100,000 for each virtual session.
“Second, the increase in the oath administration fee from N200 to over N1,500. Our clients have complained about this increase, and it has, also, affected legal practitioners who are constantly being questioned by their clients.
“Third, there is the issue of restrictions placed on lawyers . As it stands today, lawyers cannot process more than four witness oaths in a single day.
“The question then is : if I have 15 or more witnesses in cases what happens? We believe this policy unjustifiably limits the ability of lawyers to carry out their professional duties”, Aderemi stated.
This is as he informed that the boycott of court proceedings became the last resort after several futile attempts to amicably resolve the issues with the authorities.
The NBA Chairman who expressed happiness with the high compliance level of the boycott, however, explained that the protest may have taken lawyers from outside the State off-guard.
But reacting to the development which left many litigants, lawyers from outside Ogun State, and other court users stranded, the Chief Registrar of the State High Court Olakulehin Oke, insisted that there were no pre-action notices from the NBA before embarking on the boycott.
According to him, contrary to the position of the Lawyers’ umbrella body, there were no recorded communications from the NBA in relation to its grievances, and the decision to withdraw their services.
However, he blamed the increase in some of the chargeable fees on the prevailing circumstances in the country.
“Technology comes with costs. Establishing, maintaining and operating virtual court facilities require significant investment.
” Since the introduction of these provisions, virtual court rooms have been installed in nine of the 11 judicial divisions in Ogun state, and more than 600 virtual hearings have been successfully conducted”, Oke explained.
He further noted that the new court hearing regime have so far benefitted many litigants.
According to Oke, since the commencement of the innovation, witnesses from Canada, the United States of America, USA , Australia and other foreign countries have testified from their various bases.
Similarly, the Chief Registrar emphasized that the increase in the oath administration fee was necessitated by certain digital reforms carried out within the system for the purpose of seamless operations.
He noted that the new system is not only applicable to Ogun state, but is in vogue in states like Ondo ,Rivers, Oyo, Lagos and the Federal Capital Territory, FCT.
According to him, a comparative study will even reveal that the fees being charged in Ogun state are lower than in most of the aforementioned States which have keyed into the digitalized arrangement.
The ongoing alleged fraudulent activities of the self-style Director-General of fictitious agency, Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council, (PFIPC), Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi is not the first as
more facts emerged on his past activities, this time from his home state in Osun.
Report disclosed that Adeyemi was once an aide of Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke and reportedly sacked for fraudulent act.
The PFIPC, which he claimed to head was disowned by the presidency, while he levelled allegation of bribery against the Chief of Staff to President Bola Tinubu, Femi Gbajabiamila.
Subsequently he has come under prosecution, with the police accusing him of forgery and impersonation among others.
It was gathered that Prince Adeyemi once served as Senior Special Assistant (SSA) on Protocol to incumbent Osun Governor for four months.
A top government source in Osun stated that : “It is true that His Excellency appointed Adeyemi in 2023. But his appointment did not last for five months as he was sacked because of his shady deals.
“He was saddled with the responsibility of handling visa and travelling documents for the governor and other government officials.
“He was not really based in Osun State at that time.
Adeniyi Adeyemi
“After four months of his appointment, the governor received a letter from the French embassy seeking clarification on an issue earlier raised by His Excellency.
“We were confused because the government had never raised any letter to that embassy.
“We investigated further and discovered that Adeyemi had used his office to write to the French embassy and forged the signature of Governor Adeleke and others for the purpose he was fraudulently pursuing at that time.
“When we discovered the shady deal he was into, we informed the Chief of Staff and also the governor, who directed the Secretary to the State Government to sack him immediately.
“Governor Adeleke had warned us that he would not tolerate corruption in his cabinet when we were appointed, so he did not even entertain any plea from him or those he sent to beg for mercy.”
Speaking from undisclosed location, embattled Director General of Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council, (PFIPC) Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Mathew has confirmed the invasion of his mother’s house.
Prince Adeyemi, who is involved in an imbroglio with the Chief of Staff to President Bola Tinubu, Femi Gbajabiamila claimed the security agents numbering over 20 invaded his parents house in search of him.
He did not disclose where the house was located or the security agents involved, but said the incident happened on Friday night.
Prince Adeyemi was accused by the Federal Government of setting up a fake government parastatal.
Investigation so far has revealed that the agency received a budget allocation of over N1.3bn in the 2026 budget.
It also has an established office at the Federal Secretariat Abuja and recruited over 300 Staff, which Prince Adeyemi claimed was approved by the Presidency.
He also made other allegations against the person of the Chief of Staff.
There is a twist in the controversy trailing the ‘fake’ Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC), as personnel of the Nigeria Police arrested the father of Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi, who claims to be the Director-General of the disowned council.
The police had earlier announced that Adeyemi has been taken to court.
Officers reportedly stormed the family’s residence in Ogbomoso on Monday in search of Adeyemi.
In his absence, Adeyemi’s father was arrested alongside a family friend who had visited the home on Monday morning, leaving Adeyemi’s elderly mother in distress.
Human rights lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) confirmed the arrest, questioning its legality and describing it as a case of substituted arrest.
“The father has been arrested. There is no legal basis for substituted arrests.
“The young man has promised to show up in court, so why arrest his father?” Falana said.
The incident has sparked concerns over due process, with legal observers expected to closely monitor developments in the case.
The Office of the Accountant General of the Federation, OAGF, has debunked claims that the controversial and phantom Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council PFIPC owned and operated a Central Bank of Nigeria CBN domiciliary accounts.
The Presidency, in the wake of the scandal over the status of the non-existent agency, had in a statement from Presidential Adviser, Bayo Onanuga, noted that the PFIPC Director General, Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi misled the AGF into opening CBN account for the agency.
According to Onanuga ,the police in the course of its inquest into the circumstances surrounding the status of the agency, discovered that Adeyemi used documents he allegedly fraudulently obtained from the office of the AGF to open account with the Country apex financial institution.
However, responding to the ongoing controversy, the OAGF insisted that although steps were started for the purpose of opening CBN accounts by the PFIPC, the processes were never concluded.
Bawa Mokwa, the Director of Public Relations in the OAGF, informed that the account opening processes were initiated shortly after the convener of the agency, Adeyemi presented a purported letter of appointment as the DG of an already existing Government body.
He emphasized that the processes later got stalled following the inability of the progenitors of the phantom interventionist agency to present names of the would-be signatories to the accounts .
“The account has not seen the light of the day. It has also not received one Kobo because it was never fully opened and activated.
“The Accountant General has not released any money to the agency because there is no operational account for such payments”, Mokwa submitted.
While admitting that the agency may have had budgetary allocations to its name, Mokwa however, noted that provisions in the Appropriation Act does not automatically translate into official release of funds.
He emphasized that there must be certain minimum acceptable standards and variables that have to be met before a Government body receives budgetary allocations and other entitlements.
This is as the OAGF debunked claims suggesting that salaries were also paid to staff of the agency.
It will be recalled that the office of the Head of Service of the Federation, HoSF, was reported to have greenlighted the PFIPC to source and recruit about 300 staffers for the operations of its offices across the country.
But according to Mokwa, all federal agencies are not permitted to recruit staff without the expressed approval of relevant authorities, including the Federal Character Commission FCC, the Budget Office, and the Federal Civil Service Commission, FCSC .
He noted that such procedures must be strictly adhered to before such staff are enrolled on the Integrated Payroll and Personal Information System IPPIS.
He explained that despite an agency being granted a waiver to recruit, an approval from all relevant bodies must be obtained before the commencement of the process.
The status of the PFIPC, and its supposed DG, Adeyemi, as well as the alleged involvement of Government officials, especially the President’s Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajiabiamila, has continued to occupy public discuss, with not a few calling for an independent probe to unravel the actual circumstances surrounding the unfortunate development .
