Gbajabiamila Sues Adeyemi For ₦15bn Over Alleged 48% Kickback Claim

Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, has filed a ₦15 billion defamation suit against Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, over allegations that he demanded a 48 per cent kickback from a ₦27.3 billion take-off grant approved for a federal agency.

In the suit, Gbajabiamila is seeking ₦10 billion as general damages, ₦5 billion as aggravated damages and ₦200 million as the cost of the action.

He is also asking the court to compel Matthew to publish a full retraction and unconditional apology in five national newspapers and to pin the apology on all social media platforms and online channels where the alleged defamatory statements were published for 30 days.

The Chief of Staff, through his legal team from Pinheiro LP led by Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Kemi Pinheiro, described the allegations as false, malicious and defamatory.

According to the statement of claim, Gbajabiamila denied ever meeting or communicating with Matthew or authorising anyone to demand or receive money on his behalf.

The suit arose from allegations made by Matthew during a press conference in which he claimed that a disagreement developed after Gbajabiamila allegedly demanded a 48 per cent kickback from the ₦27.3 billion take-off grant.

Matthew also alleged that ₦400 million had already been paid through a proxy on behalf of the Chief of Staff, while an additional ₦200 million was required to secure presidential approvals.

"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.

The case also references Matthew's claims concerning the death of an alleged intermediary, Babatunde Tanimola, whom he described as the link between himself and the Chief of Staff.

Matthew alleged that Tanimola died in a hotel fire in Utako, Abuja, on October 22, 2025, a day after Gbajabiamila allegedly petitioned the police.

He further claimed he narrowly escaped an assassination attempt along the Abuja-Kaduna Expressway in September 2025 and alleged that a directive from "above" prevented the Department of State Services (DSS) and the Nigeria Police Force from recovering mobile phones he claimed contained vital evidence.

According to the court documents, Gbajabiamila's lawyers issued a cease-and-desist notice on July 7, 2026, demanding an immediate withdrawal of the allegations, a public retraction and an apology.

Rather than retract the claims, the suit alleges that Matthew granted an interview to social media influencer VeryDarkMan.

In his witness statement on oath, Gbajabiamila argued that Matthew made several admissions during that interview which contradicted his earlier allegations.

According to the claimant, Matthew admitted he had never met him in person, never conducted a video call or any other form of verification to confirm the identity of the person he believed to be the Chief of Staff, and that all communications were conducted through the late Tanimola.

Gbajabiamila also stated that Matthew admitted he could neither confirm nor deny whether the Chief of Staff was telling the truth and said he intended to submit his documents to the police for verification.

Despite those admissions, the Chief of Staff alleged that Matthew repeated the allegations during an appearance on Channels Television's Politics Today on July 13, 2026.

The court filings further disclosed that Matthew is already facing criminal prosecution before the Federal High Court, Abuja, in Charge No. FHC/ABJ/CR/652/2026: Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew & Others.

According to the suit, the criminal charges relate to alleged forged presidential documents and forged appointment letters, which Gbajabiamila's legal team said formed the basis of Matthew's public allegations.

The FCT High Court has directed Matthew, whose address was listed as unknown but who is deemed to be within the court's jurisdiction, to enter an appearance within 14 days after being served with the originating processes or risk judgment being entered against him.

In his sworn statement, Gbajabiamila maintained that allegations accusing him of demanding bribes, abusing his office and interfering with law enforcement agencies were entirely false and had caused serious damage to his personal and professional reputation.

The former Speaker of the House of Representatives said he had built his reputation over several decades of public service on integrity, honesty and fidelity to duty.

While acknowledging that public officials are subject to scrutiny, he argued that the allegations went beyond legitimate criticism and amounted to false accusations of corruption, bribery, abuse of office and other criminal misconduct presented as facts.

Gbajabiamila said he became aware of the allegations around June 25, 2026, after they were widely circulated through television broadcasts, online news platforms and social media.

He denied demanding any percentage of the alleged take-off grant, receiving any money through proxies, authorising anyone to negotiate on his behalf or interfering with any security agency.

He also denied involvement in matters relating to the late Tanimola or any alleged attempt on Matthew's life.

According to the Chief of Staff, despite opportunities to withdraw the allegations after the cease-and-desist notice and subsequent media appearances, Matthew failed to retract his claims.

He argued that the repeated publications generated fresh public debate and enquiries from associates, colleagues and members of the public, further damaging his reputation.

Gbajabiamila told the court that he deliberately refrained from responding through the media because he believed the courtroom was the appropriate forum for resolving the dispute.

He said the action was instituted not only to vindicate his personal reputation but also to protect the integrity and dignity of the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President from what he described as false and reckless allegations.

The Chief of Staff urged the court to grant all the reliefs sought, expressing confidence that the evidence before the court would establish the falsity of the allegations.