The man claiming to be the Director-General of the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC), Adeniyi Adeyemi, has rejected plans by the House of Representatives ad hoc committee to question him behind closed doors while in police custody, insisting that any appearance before lawmakers should be conducted in public.

Adeyemi, through his lawyer, Ademola Oyedokun, said on Wednesday that while he welcomed the House investigation into the alleged establishment and operations of the PFIPC, he opposed the committee’s decision to interrogate him at an undisclosed location.

According to the lawyer, fairness requires that Adeyemi be allowed to publicly respond to allegations made against him during the committee’s open hearings.

“We have read that the committee intends to interview our client at an undisclosed date and place. We ask it, respectfully, to think again.

“Everyone else in this matter has been heard in public, and what has been said about our client was said in public. He should be allowed to answer in the same place it was said,” Oyedokun said.

He urged the committee to invoke its powers under Section 89 of the 1999 Constitution to compel the police to produce Adeyemi before a public hearing.

“Section 89 of the Constitution gives the committee power to summon any person and to compel his attendance.

“We ask it to use that power and require the police to produce our client at a public sitting. He will attend on any date it names, with his counsel, and answer every question put to him,” he stated.

Oyedokun said his client would address criminal allegations before the Federal High Court and relevant investigative agencies but maintained that the House inquiry into how the PFIPC came into existence and whether government officials acted upon it should be conducted openly.

“Our client does not ask the committee to compromise any investigation. He will answer in public the questions this committee was constituted to ask and will reserve, upon legal advice, any question touching a matter before a court or an agency.

“Those may be taken separately and in private. What cannot be right is that the whole of his account be taken behind a closed door because part of it is sensitive.”

The lawyer also challenged the legality of Adeyemi’s continued detention, arguing that the bench warrant relied upon by the police only authorised his arrest and production before the Federal High Court and did not empower law enforcement authorities to keep him in prolonged custody.

“No order committing him to custody has ever been made, served on him or shown to him, and none could have been made because he has never been brought before any court,” he said.

The House of Representatives ad hoc committee had announced on Tuesday that it would question Adeyemi at an undisclosed location while he remains in police custody.

Committee Chairman, Yusuf Gagdi, said the arrangement was necessary to avoid interfering with ongoing investigations by the Nigeria Police Force, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).

Gagdi explained that although the committee had invited Adeyemi to appear before it, the police informed lawmakers that he remained in custody pursuant to a court order.

He added that the National Assembly would not act in a manner that undermined the judiciary or violated the principle of separation of powers, stressing that lawmakers lacked the authority to override an existing court order directing the suspect’s detention.

The committee is investigating allegations surrounding the creation and operations of the PFIPC, including claims of impersonation, forgery, financial impropriety and the unlawful use of government facilities and official insignia.