The Nigeria Police Force is expected to arraign Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew before the Federal High Court in Abuja over allegations that he operated a fictitious federal government agency and used forged official documents to obtain recognition from public institutions.
Adeyemi is scheduled to appear before Justice Mohammed Umar on Tuesday, July 14, 2026, in a case that has generated questions about security checks, Nigeria’s budget process and the vulnerability of government institutions to alleged impersonation,Police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency
In the criminal charge marked FHC/ABJ/CR/562/2025, the police charged Adeyemi alongside two other persons with eight counts bordering on alleged conspiracy, forgery, impersonation and related offences.
The charge was filed on November 27, 2025, by police prosecutor Wisdom Madaki.
The case behind the focus phrase police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency concerns the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council, known as PFIPC, which the Presidency says was neither established nor authorised by the Federal Government.
Adeyemi denies being an impostor. He maintains that his appointment was genuine and has asked the court to determine the validity of the accusations against him. He remains presumed innocent unless the prosecution proves the charges beyond reasonable doubt.
Eight criminal counts filed at Federal High Court
According to court documents, the police accuse Adeyemi of presenting himself as the Director-General of the PFIPC and operating from an office on the second floor of the Federal Secretariat Complex, Phase III, Abuja.
The prosecution alleges that he relied on an appointment letter purportedly issued from the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President.
Police documents list an alleged presidential appointment letter dated March 8, 2024, among the materials expected to be tendered during the trial.
The reported plan that police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency is not the first attempt to take his plea. The case has been delayed several times since it first appeared before Justice Umar in February.
Adeyemi has not yet entered a plea to the charges, according to the most recently available court reports. Until arraignment takes place, the prosecution has not formally begun presenting its evidence against him,Police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency
The two other defendants reportedly charged with him have been identified only as Femi and Anu in some reports and are said to be at large.
The exact role allegedly played by each defendant will become clearer when the charge is read in open court and the prosecution begins calling witnesses.
Gbajabiamila listed as prosecution witness
Chief of Staff to the President Femi Gbajabiamila is listed among the prosecution witnesses.
Court documents also identify Paul Emmanuel, Jeremiah Imoukhede and Ituah Sylvester as potential witnesses. Others include officials connected to the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation and police officers involved in the investigation,Police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency
Three people reportedly posted to work with Adeyemi at the disputed council are also on the witness list. The prosecution is expected to call individuals connected to a hotel and an Anglican church in Abuja, although the specific evidence each witness will provide has not been disclosed publicly.
The decision that police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency followed a petition Gbajabiamila reportedly sent to the Inspector-General of Police and the Director-General of the State Security Service on October 17, 2025.
In the petition, the Chief of Staff alleged that his signature, official seals, reference numbers and other features of government correspondence had been falsified to create appointment documents for unauthorised organisations.
https://ogelenews.ng/police-arraign-
Gbajabiamila denied appointing Adeyemi and asked security agencies to uncover the people allegedly supporting the operation.
Adeyemi has made separate allegations against the Chief of Staff, which Gbajabiamila has denied. Those accusations are outside the eight-count police case and should not be treated as established facts.
Police list documents expected at trial
The prosecution has identified several documents it intends to tender.
They include the police investigation report, Gbajabiamila’s October 2025 petition and the disputed appointment letter allegedly presented by Adeyemi.
Other listed materials include a request for a note verbale submitted to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, correspondence relating to the opening of bank accounts and an application for approval to operate as a self-accounting government entity.
The police also listed documents concerning the reported take-off of the PFIPC, requests for land and office space across Nigeria’s 36 states, witness statements, defendant statements and photographs.
These documents will be central when police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency, because the court must determine whether they were genuine, who created them and whether Adeyemi knowingly used any false document.
The prosecution will also need to establish each element of the offences contained in the charge. The mere possession or presentation of a disputed document will not automatically prove criminal intent.
Adeyemi’s lawyers will be entitled to challenge the documents, question prosecution witnesses and present evidence supporting his claim that he received a valid appointment.
Presidency alleges 34 bank accounts
The Presidency has accused Adeyemi of operating 34 bank accounts, including nine allegedly opened in the names of fictitious government institutions.
It also claimed that he used disputed government documents to secure an account with the Central Bank of Nigeria and obtain approvals from the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation.
Presidential spokesperson Bayo Onanuga said no public funds were transferred into the Central Bank account.
That qualification is important. Reports that accounts were opened should not be rewritten to suggest that government money was paid into them unless investigators produce evidence showing that such transfers occurred.
The allegation that police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency therefore involves much more than the existence of bank accounts. The prosecution must show that the accounts were connected to criminal impersonation, false pretence or another offence charged before the court.
The Presidency further alleged that Adeyemi’s organisation communicated with foreign diplomats and held meetings with Nigerians and foreign nationals while presenting itself as a federal body.
It said the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission had raised concerns about the council’s activities before the criminal investigation.
Adeyemi insists appointment was genuine
Adeyemi has rejected the description of himself as a criminal or fake director-general.
During a television interview, he said he had an appointment letter and was confident that the court would vindicate him.
He argued that he could not have operated openly for years, met officials and maintained an office within the Federal Secretariat if the council had been entirely fabricated without the knowledge of anyone in government.
His position does not establish that the appointment was genuine, just as the Presidency’s denial does not by itself prove every criminal allegation in the charge. The disputed documents and testimony must be examined judicially.
As police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency, the court will provide the appropriate forum for both parties to present their evidence.
Adeyemi has said he is not evading trial and is prepared to clear his name. He has also referred to health problems and said he remains on medication.
His defence may ask the court to consider bail or other conditions after his plea is taken. The judge will determine any application based on the charge, his previous conduct, his health and the applicable law,Police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency
Arraignment delayed several times
The case first came up for arraignment on February 3, 2026, before Justice Umar.
The prosecution told the court that it was ready, but the defence requested additional time to study the charge. The judge granted the request and adjourned the case until February 11.
The court did not sit on that date because the judge was attending a judicial workshop. The case was subsequently moved to April 14.
Adeyemi was absent in April after his lawyer informed the court that he was unwell. The matter was adjourned to June 16.
Adeyemi attended court in June, but the defence requested another adjournment because counsel was reportedly ill and unable to proceed. Justice Umar then fixed July 14,Police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency
The latest report that police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency is therefore the result of a prosecution process that has been pending for more than seven months,Police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency
Court records also indicate that Adeyemi was arrested on October 27, 2025, and held for 23 days before being granted administrative bail on health grounds on November 19.
Repeated adjournments are permitted where justified, but they also delay the opportunity for the defendant to answer the charges and for the public to understand what occurred.
Questions over ₦1.3bn budget allocation
The controversy became politically explosive after the disputed council appeared in the 2026 federal budget with a reported allocation of approximately ₦1.3 billion.
The Presidency’s insistence that PFIPC had no legal basis immediately raised questions about how an allegedly fictitious institution entered the appropriation process.
Those questions extend beyond Adeyemi’s criminal trial.
The court case will examine his alleged conduct. It may not fully explain which public officials processed the organisation’s documents, how office space was secured, how accounts were approved or how the budgetary provision survived legislative and executive review.
President Bola Tinubu has directed the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission to investigate the council and submit its findings within 30 days.
The ICPC investigation is separate from the criminal prosecution in which police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency. It may examine institutional failures and the conduct of public officials who are not defendants in the current case.
Opposition politicians and civil society advocates have demanded a broader independent inquiry. They argue that prosecuting Adeyemi alone would not answer how the council received government recognition and appeared in the national budget.
The Senate has faced criticism for declining to open an immediate separate investigation and deciding to await the ICPC’s findingsPolice arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency,
Institutional safeguards under scrutiny
The scandal has exposed possible weaknesses in the procedures used to verify presidential appointments, create government agencies and approve official correspondence.
A genuine federal organisation normally requires a clear legal or administrative foundation, an approved mandate, identifiable supervisory authority and properly authorised leadership.
Bank account applications, office allocations, budget submissions and diplomatic correspondence should also pass through several layers of verification.
If the police allegations are proved, the case would demonstrate that one individual and his associates were allegedly able to exploit serious institutional gaps.
If Adeyemi proves that he was genuinely appointed or acted with official authorisation, the government will face a different question: why its senior officials later disowned the institution.
That is why the announcement that police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency should not become a substitute for a comprehensive investigation.
The public deserves to know whether civil servants followed established procedures, whether anyone deliberately facilitated the disputed council and whether existing safeguards are sufficient to prevent a recurrence,Police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency
Court must determine guilt, not public opinion
The controversy has produced competing accusations, political arguments and widespread public commentary.
The Presidency describes PFIPC as a fictitious organisation created through forgery and impersonation. Adeyemi insists that he received a valid appointment and operated openly with official recognition.
Neither position should be converted into a judicial conclusion by the media.
When police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency, the charges will be read to him and he will be asked to enter a plea. If he pleads not guilty, the prosecution will be required to present witnesses and documents capable of proving its case beyond reasonable doubt.
The defence will have the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses and challenge the authenticity, origin and interpretation of every disputed document.
The trial should proceed promptly, transparently and without political interference.
At the same time, the ICPC investigation should examine the wider system surrounding the alleged scheme. Nigeria will learn little from the episode if the process ends with one prosecution while the institutional failures that made the controversy possible remain unexplained.
For Ogele News, the correct approach is firm but fair: report the allegations fully, scrutinise the public institutions involved and preserve Adeniyi Adeyemi’s constitutional right to be presumed innocent until a competent court rules otherwish,Police arraign Adeniyi Adeyemi over fake agency.
https://www.npf.gov.ng/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
