PFIPC Scandal: Why Adeyemi insists on public hearing with lawyers, media present

Detained PFIPC promoter Adeniyi Adeyemi is demanding that journalists and his legal team witness his questioning by the House of Representatives, arguing that fairness requires his account to be heard in the same open manner as the allegations against him.

The House of Representatives Ad Hoc Committee investigating the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council scandal remains undecided on where to question Adeyemi, even as he insists he will not cooperate unless media and lawyers are present, a source close to the committee’s proceedings has disclosed.

Adeyemi, who has been in police custody since his arrest in Osun State on July 14, is expected to appear before the Yusuf Gagdi-led committee this week following testimonies from senior officials, including the Head of Service, Didi Walson-Jack, and Budget Office Director-General, Tanimu Yakubu.

His central argument, consistently pressed through his lawyer, Ademola Oyedokun, is one of fairness. Since the allegations against him, including claims of forgery, impersonation and financial impropriety, were aired publicly, Adeyemi contends his response deserves the same public platform rather than a closed-door session at an undisclosed location.

“Everyone else in this matter has been heard in public, and what has been said about our client was said in public. He should be allowed to answer in the same place it was said,” Oyedokun stated, invoking Section 89 of the Constitution to demand the committee compel police to produce Adeyemi at an open sitting.

Adeyemi’s team has also rejected the narrative that he snubbed the committee, insisting he remains in custody on a bench warrant, which they argue only authorises arrest and court production, not indefinite detention. They maintain no court has formally heard him speak, and no valid order justifies withholding him from a public hearing.

A family source told The Punch that Adeyemi had initially secured an agreement for media presence during a rescheduled session, only for the committee to reverse course, prompting his refusal to answer questions further.

Beyond procedural fairness, Adeyemi’s insistence on a public forum also appears strategic. His lawyers argue the House inquiry raises questions extending beyond his personal conduct, specifically, how the PFIPC gained government recognition and budgetary allocation despite allegedly lacking legal existence. Adeyemi has previously alleged that Chief of Staff Femi Gbajabiamila had links to the council’s establishment, a claim Gbajabiamila denies. His team insists a public hearing would allow these broader institutional questions to be scrutinised transparently, rather than settled behind closed doors where his account alone might be shaped without independent witnesses.

Committee chairman Gagdi has maintained that the venue decision considers ongoing parallel investigations by the police, EFCC and ICPC, and that the National Assembly cannot override existing court directives on Adeyemi’s detention.