There is something deeply troubling about the emergence of entities that present themselves as government agencies, councils, offices or special projects while questions continue to be raised about their authenticity, legal status and access to public resources. At a time when Nigeria is struggling to strengthen fiscal discipline, improve public-sector efficiency and restore citizens’ confidence in government, the reported emergence of such bodies should not be dismissed as another bureaucratic curiosity. It should be treated as a serious governance emergency.
The controversy surrounding the disputed Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFPC), founded by Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi, and the reported operation of another entity known as the National Brands Development and Made-in-Nigeria Special Project Office has raised a fundamental question: What public resources, if any, have been made available to these organisations?
This question goes beyond the identities of the organisations involved. It exposes a potentially more dangerous phenomenon: the gradual institutionalisation of structures that may operate in the shadows of government without the transparency and accountability expected of legitimate public institutions. More importantly, are there other similar agencies still operating under the cover of darkness?
This is the financial cancer in Nigeria’s economy: the creation, proliferation or abuse of institutional structures through which public resources can potentially be diverted, duplicated, concealed or inefficiently deployed. Cancer is dangerous because it can grow quietly before its consequences become visible. Public-sector financial leakages can behave in much the same way. A single questionable office may appear insignificant. But when similar structures multiply, consume public resources, enjoy official-looking recognition or gain access to government platforms, their cumulative effect can become enormous.
Nigeria does not lack government agencies. What the country often lacks is sufficient clarity about what many institutions actually do, how much they cost and what measurable value they deliver. The proliferation of questionable agencies can create institutional duplication. Two bodies may claim responsibility for similar functions, resulting in competing mandates, duplicated expenditure and confusion for citizens, businesses and investors. Worse still, ambiguity can become an instrument for avoiding accountability. When responsibilities are fragmented, failure becomes difficult to trace and public funds become harder to monitor.
There is also a serious economic-development implication. Every Naira committed to an unnecessary or unauthorised structure is a Naira unavailable for infrastructure, healthcare, education, security, industrial development or productive investment. At a time when the government is asking citizens and businesses to make sacrifices, reduce consumption and endure difficult economic reforms, any evidence of waste or financial indiscipline within government circles becomes particularly damaging.
It also undermines Nigeria’s investment proposition. Investors do not assess an economy solely by looking at interest rates, inflation, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth or stock-market performance. They also examine the quality of institutions. They want to know whether rules are clear, whether government agencies are legitimate, whether public institutions are predictable and whether contracts and investments are protected by functioning systems.
A country where individuals can allegedly create government-sounding entities without immediate detection sends the wrong signal about institutional controls. Perhaps the greatest casualty, however, is public trust. The government derives much of its legitimacy from the confidence of the people. When citizens begin to suspect that some institutions operating in the government’s name may not actually have the authority they claim, every legitimate government agency can become subject to suspicion. This creates a dangerous environment in which official communication itself loses credibility.
The way forward must therefore go beyond investigating individual organisations. The federal government needs a comprehensive audit and public register of all agencies, councils, offices, committees, special projects and presidential initiatives currently operating under its name. Each should have a clearly identifiable legal foundation, supervising ministry or authority, approved mandate, funding source, leadership structure and contact information.
Any body unable to establish its legal and administrative foundation should immediately be subjected to investigation. The government should establish a central Agency Verification and Public Accountability Portal, through which citizens, journalists, investors and businesses can independently verify whether an organisation claiming to be a federal government entity actually exists and under what authority it operates.
The Office of the Accountant-General, Auditor-General, Budget Office and relevant anti-corruption institutions must strengthen systems for tracking public resources allocated to government agencies and special initiatives. Government property, personnel and funds should never be deployed to an entity whose legal status cannot be independently established. Whistle-blowers and investigative journalists who expose suspicious government structures should be protected rather than intimidated. In a democracy, scrutiny is not an attack on government; it is one of the mechanisms through which government is kept accountable.
The Presidency must demonstrate that the era of opaque public-sector structures is over. Presidential authority should never become a shield behind which questionable institutions can hide. Nigeria’s economic challenge is not simply about raising more revenue. It is also about ensuring that the resources already available are not lost through leakages, duplication, waste and institutional abuse.
The alleged emergence of questionable government agencies should therefore serve as a wake-up call. The country does not need opaque structures. It desperately needs stronger institutions and transparent governance, not official-looking ambiguity. The fight against Nigeria’s financial cancer must begin with diagnosis, continue with accountability and end with institutional reform.
Until every naira spent in the name of government can be traced to a legitimate mandate and measurable public value, the cancer will continue to grow beneath the surface of the economy.
- business a.m. commits to publishing a diversity of views, opinions and comments. It, therefore, welcomes your reaction to this and any of our articles via email: comment@businessamlive.comÂ
Sola Oni, an integrated communications strategist, Chartered Stockbroker and Commodities Broker and Capital market registrar, is the Chief Executive Officer, Sofunix Investment and Communications. You can reach him at onisola2000@yahoo.com
How bad leaders engender brain drain in Nigeria