The House of Representatives panel probing the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC), has summoned the office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (OSGF) to clarify issues surrounding office used by the ‘fake’ agency.
This was necessitated after Head of the Civil Service of the Federation (HCSF), Mrs Didi Esther Walson-Jack, told the panel Monday that the office occupied by the agency at the Federal Secretariat, Abuja, formed part of the office accommodation officially allocated to the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (OSGF).
She clarified that the office identified as the PFIPC’s address at the Federal Secretariat, Phase III, formed part of office accommodation officially allocated for the use of the SGF and presidential aides.
She made other clarifications during her appearance before the panel.
The disclosure prompted members of the committee to question how the council came to occupy the premises despite the absence of any allocation from the Office of the Head of the Civil Service.
Committee Chairman Yusuf Gagdi subsequently directed officials of the OSGF to appear before the panel and explain the circumstances under which office accommodation allocated to the SGF’s Office was being used by the PFIPC.
ALSO READ: Reps set up panel to investigate ‘fake’ agency
Meanwhile, a director at the apex bank, Hamisu Abdullahi, said the accounts opened by the fake Agency with them were never operated because the account-opening process was not fully completed.
The committee’s directive to the OSGF followed the presentation by the Head of the Civil Service, who informed lawmakers that her office never allocated office accommodation to the PFIPC.
In its submission, the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation (OHCSF) stated that although the allocation of office space in the Federal Secretariat falls within its statutory responsibilities, there was no record showing that the PFIPC had been allocated office accommodation.
Mrs Walson-Jack also told the committee that the controversial body was never granted approval for its organisational structure despite obtaining an authorised establishment providing for 314 staff positions.
According to her, records showed that the PFIPC requested approval of its organisational structure on August 6, 2025, but the request was not granted because it was submitted without the required supporting documents.
She disclosed that during the 2025 annual manpower budget defence, representatives of the Presidential Economic Advisory Council (PEAC)/PFIPC appeared before the Organisation Design and Development Department, stating that the organisation was participating for the first time.
The representatives reportedly informed the Office that the council was operating mainly with officers deployed or seconded from other government institutions and requested an authorised establishment and a recruitment waiver to enable it to recruit substantive personnel.
Mrs Walson-Jack said the council informed the Office that 14 officers, including the Director-General and Chief Executive Officer, were already in place and sought approval for additional staffing.
She said the council submitted photocopies of the appointment letter of its Director-General, documents describing its mandate and enabling instrument, as well as evidence showing that it had already been captured in the budget.
ALSO READ: ‘Fake’ agency DG Adeyemi arrested by police in Osun state
The OHCSF explained that, in line with its established administrative procedure, the request was reviewed alongside those of other ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) and incorporated into the fourth batch of manpower requests for the year.
According to the submission, the batch, comprising requests from 88 MDAs, was approved on July 18, 2025, by the Permanent Secretary, Common Services Office, who was overseeing the Office of the Head of the Civil Service at the time.
Following the approval, the Organisation Design and Development Department issued an authorised establishment providing for a total workforce of 314 positions, comprising 14 existing officers and 300 additional positions.
She also informed the committee that records showed the authorised establishment was collected on behalf of the council by an individual representing the organisation.
Mrs Walson-Jack further explained that although authorised establishments and recruitment waivers are ordinarily issued simultaneously, only the authorised establishment was ready when representatives of the council came to collect the documents on August 5, 2025, while the recruitment waiver was issued two days later, on August 7.
She explained that the fourth batch of approvals was processed manually because the Office’s Enterprise Content Management System was unavailable at the time.
According to her, it was subsequently discovered that the document presented by the council as its enabling legal instrument did not possess the required legal features.
On staff deployment, Mrs Walson-Jack told lawmakers that the OHCSF never deployed any officer to the council.
She acknowledged receiving a request seeking the deployment of officers to the Office of the Director-General of the PEAC/PFIPC but said the request was merely noted for consideration and no deployment was approved.
She clarified that the recruitment and placement of staff are the responsibility of individual agencies and not that of the Office of the Head of the Civil Service.
Responding to questions on compliance with guidelines governing the creation and operation of presidential councils and special purpose vehicles, she said such matters fall outside the mandate of the OHCSF and are the responsibility of the relevant agency or the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation.
She also informed the committee that the Office had no record of any request from the council seeking approval for its conditions of service.
According to her, remuneration and emoluments of personnel fall under the National Salaries, Incomes and Wages Commission, while those of political appointees and chief executive officers are determined by the Revenue Mobilisation, Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC).
She further stated that the council’s reporting lines, supervision and oversight mechanisms fall outside the jurisdiction of the Office of the Head of the Civil Service.
