Femi Gbajabiamila bribery News surfaces as DG accuses him of N600m bribe

Femi Gbajabiamila bribery News surfaces as DG accuses him of N600m bribe

Femi Gbajabiamila bribery news has surfaced, as Adeniyi Adeyemi, the director-general of the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) accused the chief of staff to President Bola Tinubu of getting N400 million from him in bribery through a proxy and demanding an additional N200 million to secure his appointment.

The Femi Gbajabiamila bribery news erupted on Thursday when Mr Adeyemi alleged at a press conference on Thursday that the presidential aide also demanded 48 per cent of the PFIPC’s N27.4 billion take-off grant, a request he said he rejected.

The allegations come amid a dispute over the agency’s existence after Mr Gbajabiamila, in a June 11 statement, said the PFIPC did not exist under President Bola Tinubu’s administration and that Mr Adeyemi had never been appointed to head it.Politics

Mr Adeyemi described the denial as an attempt to “silence legitimate questions,” stating that it stemmed from his refusal to yield to the alleged demands of the president’s chief of staff.

“The major rationale behind the disagreement between myself and the chief of staff is because he allegedly requested 48 per cent of the take-off grant (N27,395,510,136) from the same agency, which he denies, to which I rejected after he collected a total sum of 400 million by proxy, with a remaining balance of 200 million to secure the said appointment,” Mr Adeyemi said.

The chief of staff could not be immediately reached for comments on the allegations.

The PFIPC chief questioned how the agency appeared on pages 50 and 51 of the 2026 appropriation budget if it did not exist, arguing that Mr Gbajabiamila “should possibly resign his appointment now” if he allowed Mr Tinubu to sign such a document.Politics

He said, “If the agency does not exist, yet found its way into the Nigerian national budget, what that means is that the entire 2026 appropriation budget is a fraud and should be discarded.

“For President Bola Tinubu to append his signature to a budget that includes a non-existent agency, according to his chief of staff, is an embarrassment to this hardworking government.”

According to Mr Adeyemi, the “non-existent” agency has operated for over a year, has a space at the federal secretariat, a domiciliary account, a pounds account, and a treasury single account, all of which are domiciled with the Central Bank of Nigeria.Africans & Diaspora

He argued these would not be possible without the agency’s existence.

He accused Mr Gbajabiamila of attempting to frame him as a fraud and plotting to use security agencies to portray his diplomatic engagements as espionage or disloyalty.

Mr Adeyemi also questioned why Mr Gbajabiamila issued the disclaimer instead of President Tinubu’s media aides and challenged him to make available documents and communication trails from the president’s office for examination.Politics

He further alleged that he survived an assassination attempt along the Abuja-Kaduna Expressway on September 7, 2025, during which, he said, vital documents and his phones were carted away.

“I reported the case to the police and Department of State Security. I was told the phones were tracked to Gombe State, but an insider confided to me that there was an order from above to refrain from taking any further actions,” he stated.

He urged the president to set up an investigative panel to probe the alleged assassination attempt and the death of Babatunde Tanimola, whom he said was an intermediary between him and Mr Gbajabiamila, even though “the police claimed he died through fire accident at a hotel in Utako, Abuja, on 22nd of October, 2025.”

Also, Mr Adeyemi said the panel should compel the president’s chief of staff to produce all documents he has signed since assuming office.

The PFIPC DG said that the panel, which should comprise civil society organisations and international organisations, should also compel Mr Gbajabiamila to step down pending the outcome of the findings.

He further recommended a review of budgetary references and institutional records, the publication of transparent findings, and a probe of all relevant individuals.