Fake Presidency Agency Scandal: Head of Civil Service Admits Due Diligence Failure as Reps Uncover Forged Documents

Nigeria’s Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Mrs. Esther Didi Walson-Jack, has admitted that her office failed to carry out adequate verification before approving requests linked to two controversial presidential agencies now under investigation for allegedly operating with fake documents.

Appearing before the House of Representatives Ad-hoc Committee probing the alleged creation of the Presidential Economic Advisory Council (PEAC) and the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC), Walson-Jack acknowledged that the Office of the Head of the Civil Service relied on documents that were later discovered to be fraudulent.

“We now, having seen all the facts and observed all the documents, concede that we ought to have carried out more due diligence in discharge of the duties of the office in issuing an authorised establishment and a recruitment waiver to the PEAC/PFIPC,” she told lawmakers.

She explained that officials representing the purported agencies attended the 2025 Annual Manpower Budget Defence with what appeared to be valid documents, including an Establishment Act and a letter appointing a Director-General. Based on existing civil service procedures, her office approved an authorised establishment and recruitment waiver after reviewing the documents presented.

The Head of Service, however, admitted that the documents should have been subjected to more thorough scrutiny. Drawing on her legal background, she said she later realised that the Establishment Act submitted by the agency was not authentic.

“I requested to see the documents myself and I saw that the Establishment Act was not really an authentic Act. I have almost 30 years of legal practice experience and immediately I saw it, I knew it was not,” she said.

She also questioned the authenticity of the appointment letter allegedly issued by the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President, noting visible differences between the signatures on the disputed document and those on genuine official correspondence.

The committee chairman disclosed that forensic experts from the Nigeria Police had already confirmed the signatures were fake and did not even attempt to imitate the original. He added that investigators had also established that the alleged Act establishing the agencies lacked mandatory legal features such as citation numbers, gazette references and official legislative identification.

Lawmakers maintained that both the appointment letter and the Establishment Act were fabricated and accused those behind the agencies of using fake documents to secure government approvals.

Despite acknowledging shortcomings in the verification process, Walson-Jack insisted her office acted in line with existing procedures, explaining that the approvals were processed in the same manner as requests from other ministries, departments and agencies.

“Everything was done in accordance with the practice in the office. Out of the 88 ministries, departments and agencies processed, we are really surprised that we were unable to detect that PEAC/PFIPC had actually given us a false Establishment Act and what has now been proved to be a false letter of appointment,” she said.

She pledged to strengthen internal verification systems to prevent similar incidents in the future, assuring lawmakers that the Office of the Head of the Civil Service would review its processes to make them more resistant to fraud.

The committee also turned its attention to the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation, where officials defended the issuance of an administrative code to the purported agencies. A former Director of Consolidation Account and Director of Federal Projects, Joshua Patmi Luka, told lawmakers that the administrative code was forwarded to the Permanent Secretary of the State House as part of the verification process.

However, the committee questioned the procedure after evidence reportedly showed that the response never reached the Permanent Secretary and was instead collected by the individual posing as the agency’s Director-General, raising further concerns about the handling of the approval process.