Bayo Onanuga’s July 1, 2026 statement is more than a denial, but a detailed prosecution brief in public form. By laying out dates, letters, police findings, and a prior 2016 fraud case, the Presidency seeks to isolate Adeyemi Adeniyi Matthew as a serial imposter and to protect the Chief of Staff’s office from collateral damage. The analysis by Ekuson Nw’Ogbunka Our Managing Editor I Abuja tests whether the rebuttal holds up, what it reveals about institutional gaps, and what happens next.
Onanuga flatly states that Adeyemi Matthew is “unknown” to the Chief of Staff’s office and that the “Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council” is fictitious. That removes any ambiguity about official affiliation. The statement does not rely on rhetoric alone. It cites an October 17 Chief of Staff petition to DSS/Police, forged signatures/seals, a fake address at Federal Secretariat Phase III, and a US note verbale request. Specifics raise credibility.
NIPC flagged cross-purpose activity first. Foreign Affairs wrote on October 15, 2025 about a rogue ambassadorial meeting. NSA and OSGF were looped in. This shows multiple MDAs detecting the scam independently. The Chief of Staff’s line is key: he does not issue appointments; that is the SGF’s exclusive preserve. That procedural fact undercuts Adeyemi’s claim at its legal root.
On October 27, 2025, Adeyemi was arrested at the Secretariat. Searches yielded forged documents. Police also traced 34 bank accounts, including nine under FIPA-APP and FCT Investment Promotion Act, and a misleadingly opened CBN account. Critically, police say no government money entered the CBN account. That limits fiscal exposure but not reputational harm.
Adeyemi named Dolapo Babatunde Tanimola as the forger. Police confirm Tanimola died in a Kachi Hotel fire on October 22, 2025, five days before Adeyemi’s arrest. The allegation cannot be tested against the named accomplice. An eight-count charge was filed November 27, 2025 at the Federal High Court, Abuja, with a July 27 court date. Adeyemi was on police bail when he renewed the DG claim, triggering the June 8, 2026 disclaimer.
Onanuga cites a 2016 case where Adeyemi posed as “Ambassador and President-General” of a non-existent “World Youth Organisation” allegedly affiliated to the UN. That frames this as recidivism, not a one-off. The police report itself says Adeyemi’s acts “bring the office of the Chief of Staff to the President and the Presidency to disrepute.” Onanuga’s public rebuttal is therefore damage control as much as fact-checking.
Hosting ambassadors at Wells Carlton without MFA clearance “contravenes extant rules,” per the Ministry’s letter. That shows how impostors can create diplomatic confusion. From October 15–17 complaints to an October 27 arrest, security agencies moved fast. That counters narratives of a slow state.
Onanuga urges the public to await trial and judgment, noting that comments now are sub judice. That is a prudent legal boundary, but also a way to freeze political commentary. By naming banks, addresses, letters, and prior fraud, the Presidency shifts the story from “who appointed him” to “how he forged and paraded.” That is effective framing.
That Adeyemi could open accounts, print letters with seals, and convene meetings with diplomats points to verification gaps in protocol, hospitality, and banking KYC for “government-sounding” entities. Multiple clarifications from OSGF, NSA, and the Chief of Staff show inter-office coordination. The public now sees which office actually makes appointments. That is useful administrative transparency.
Onanuga cautions politicians against “swallowing his narrative hook, line and sinker.” The timing of Adeyemi’s renewed claim, while on bail, invites suspicion of opportunism. Who printed the seals? Who granted office space in the Secretariat? How did 34 accounts get opened without red flags? Those gaps will matter at trial. If the prosecution succeeds, this case can serve as a template: rapid inter-agency alerts, public disclaimers with evidence, and banking forensics. It could deter similar “council” scams.
Onanuga’s disclaimer is robust on facts, clear on process, and strategic in tone. It protects the Presidency, isolates Adeyemi, and puts the burden back on the courts. The larger task is systemic: closing the verification loopholes that let a fictitious council look real long enough to meet ambassadors and open bank accounts.
