Fresh Twist! Gbajabiamila Slams Adeyemi With ₦15bn Lawsuit Over PFIPC Allegations

The Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, has filed a ₦15 billion defamation suit against Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew, who has presented himself as the Director-General of the controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC).....KINDLY READ THE FULL STORY HERE▶

The suit, filed before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, stems from allegations by Adeyemi that Gbajabiamila demanded a 48 per cent kickback from a purported ₦27.3 billion take-off grant allegedly approved for the disputed agency.

Gbajabiamila is asking the court to award him ₦10 billion in general damages, ₦5 billion in aggravated damages and ₦200 million as the cost of prosecuting the suit.

He is also seeking an order compelling Adeyemi to publish a full retraction and unconditional apology in five national newspapers. In addition, the Chief of Staff wants the apology pinned for 30 days across all social media platforms and online channels where the allegations were published.

The action was instituted by a legal team from Pinheiro LP led by Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Kemi Pinheiro. Other members of the team include Folu Oguntade (SAN), Olukayode Enitan (SAN) and Chukwudi Enebeli (SAN).

Gbajabiamila Denies Allegations

In his statement of claim, Gbajabiamila denied ever meeting, speaking with or maintaining any official, personal or professional relationship with Adeyemi.

“The claimant has never met the defendant, never held any meeting with him and has never authorised any intermediary, representative, agent or proxy to demand or receive money on his behalf,” the court filing stated.

He also denied authorising anyone to negotiate or receive money on his behalf in relation to the alleged agency.

Adeyemi had alleged during a press conference that a dispute arose after Gbajabiamila allegedly demanded 48 per cent of the agency’s proposed ₦27.3 billion take-off grant. He further claimed that ₦400 million had already been paid through an intermediary for the Chief of Staff and that another ₦200 million was required to secure presidential approvals.

Gbajabiamila rejected the allegations, insisting he neither received the alleged ₦400 million nor any other payment from Adeyemi or his associates.

He described the claims accusing him of bribery, abuse of office and corruption as entirely false and fabricated.

Rejects Claims on Death, Attack

The suit also addresses Adeyemi’s claims regarding the late Babatunde Tanimola, whom he identified as an intermediary between himself and the Chief of Staff.

Adeyemi alleged that Tanimola died in a suspicious fire at a hotel in Utako, Abuja, in October 2025, shortly after Gbajabiamila reportedly petitioned the police over the PFIPC controversy.

He also claimed to have survived an assassination attempt on the Abuja-Kaduna Expressway and alleged that security agencies failed to recover his missing mobile phones because of a “directive from above.”

Gbajabiamila denied any involvement in Tanimola’s death, the alleged attack on Adeyemi or the disappearance of his phones.

He also denied directing the Nigeria Police Force, the Department of State Services (DSS), the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), or any other security agency to harass, intimidate or shield anyone connected to the matter.

The Chief of Staff further rejected claims that he used his office to pressure media organisations or suppress information relating to the PFIPC controversy.

Cites Contradictory Statements

According to the court documents, Gbajabiamila’s lawyers issued Adeyemi a cease-and-desist letter dated July 6, 2026, demanding a retraction and public apology. The notice was published in several national newspapers the following day.

The claimant alleged that rather than withdrawing the accusations, Adeyemi granted an interview to social media commentator Martins Otse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan.

Gbajabiamila argued that Adeyemi made admissions during the interview that contradicted his earlier allegations.

According to the suit, Adeyemi acknowledged that he had never met the Chief of Staff physically or communicated with him through a video call, adding that all alleged interactions were conducted through the late Tanimola.

The claimant further stated that Adeyemi admitted he had no independent means of confirming that the person he believed he was dealing with was actually Gbajabiamila and could neither affirm nor deny whether the Chief of Staff was telling the truth.

Gbajabiamila contended that those statements differed significantly from the categorical allegations earlier made against him.

He also alleged that Adeyemi repeated the accusations during an appearance on Channels Television’s Politics Today on July 13, despite receiving the cease-and-desist notice.

According to the Chief of Staff, the repeated publications sparked widespread public discussion and inquiries from friends, associates and professional contacts both within and outside Nigeria, causing significant damage to his personal and professional reputation.

He told the court that he deliberately avoided engaging in media exchanges over the allegations because he believed the judiciary was the proper forum for resolving the dispute.

Gbajabiamila added that the suit was filed not only to protect his reputation but also to safeguard the integrity of the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President.

He argued that although public officials are open to scrutiny, Adeyemi’s allegations amounted to serious criminal accusations presented as established facts.

The court documents also noted that Adeyemi is currently facing criminal charges before the Federal High Court in Abuja in connection with alleged forgery of presidential documents and appointment letters, allegations he has denied.

The FCT High Court has directed Adeyemi to enter an appearance within 14 days of being served with the originating processes, warning that judgment may be entered against him if he fails to respond within the stipulated period.