Fresh reactions have continued to trail the Presidency’s defence of Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, over allegations linking him to an alleged appointment-for-cash scheme, with opposition figures, legal practitioners and members of the public demanding an independent investigation into the matter.
The renewed calls followed the Presidency’s dismissal of allegations made by Adeniyi Matthew, who claimed that Gbajabiamila demanded billions of naira from the take-off grant of a purported federal agency and allegedly received N400 million through proxies to facilitate his appointment.
In a statement issued on Wednesday, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, described Matthew as an impostor and a “serial fraudster,” insisting that he was never appointed by the Presidency and was not recognised as Director-General of the purported Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council/Presidential Economic Advisory Council.
According to Onanuga, security agencies have been investigating Matthew since October 2025 following petitions from the Office of the Chief of Staff over allegations of impersonation and forgery.
The Presidency stated that police investigations established that the agency in question did not exist and alleged that Matthew forged appointment documents, falsely presented himself as a presidential appointee, operated multiple bank accounts, including accounts allegedly opened in the names of fictitious government agencies, and secured a Central Bank of Nigeria account through false representations.
The statement further explained that the Office of the Chief of Staff first alerted authorities after officials of the Nigerian Investment Promotion Council complained that another organisation appeared to be operating as a parallel government agency. The Presidency urged Nigerians to disregard the allegations against Gbajabiamila, maintaining that the matter is already before the court. The Gbajabiamila appointment allegations have, however, continued to generate widespread debate.
Among the earliest critics was Demola Olarenwaju, Senior Political Assistant to former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and the African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate for the 2027 election. In a post on X, Olarenwaju argued that the Presidency’s explanation failed to absolve the Chief of Staff of responsibility.
He wrote: “by the watery presidential rebuttal, Gbajabiamila is either guilty of connivance or guilty of negligence, no two ways about it. If that fellow scammed himself into Nigeria’s budget, then Gbajabiamila must be sacked for negligence and lack of due diligence. If the fellow connived with him in the scam as we suspect by evidence, Gbaja should be prosecuted.”
Lawyer Festus Ogun described the controversy as reflecting broader governance concerns under President Bola Tinubu’s administration. According to him: “the Gbajabiamila scandal tells you everything you need to know about the Bola Tinubu presidency.”
Another lawyer, Muhammed Adam, who posts on X as @egi_nupe, questioned the consistency of the Presidency’s account. He stated: “As many times as I have read this story and its narrative, it keeps making no sense. Those involved in this scandal are not telling us the truth.”
The Gbajabiamila appointment allegations also attracted strong reactions from Nigerians on social media, with many calling for a transparent and independent investigation. One X user, @dolapomabinuori, questioned how a purportedly fictitious government agency could allegedly receive budget allocations, open a Central Bank account and operate from the Federal Secretariat without official knowledge. Another user, @Ismailmlf07, argued that the allegations deserved proper scrutiny, stating:
“Something is definitely fishy, and the accusation against Femi Gbajabiamila has to be taken seriously. There will be no smoke without fire. A thorough and transparent investigation will solve the anomaly.” Similarly, @FightoryouDie questioned how both chambers of the National Assembly could allegedly correspond with a non-existent agency, insisting that any official found culpable should face due legal process.
Additional reactions continued to flood social media as Nigerians debated the implications of the controversy. User @FavoredSinner described the allegations as a serious governance concern, arguing that the reported circumstances surrounding the alleged agency required comprehensive public explanation.
Another commentator, @Mr_Emmcap__, criticised the Presidency’s defence of the Chief of Staff, insisting that only an independent investigation could establish the facts and reassure Nigerians. Meanwhile, @lollypeezle expressed frustration over the allegations, calling for greater accountability from public officials.
As public debate continues, the Presidency maintains that Matthew’s allegations lack credibility and insists that the legal process already underway will determine the issues raised. The Gbajabiamila appointment allegations remain one of the country’s most discussed political controversies, with opposition figures and civil society continuing to demand greater transparency and accountability.
