Fresh correspondence bearing the letterhead of the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (OSGF) has raised new questions over the legal status of the National Brands Development and Made in Nigeria Special Project Office, which anti-corruption authorities recently described as an unauthorised government operation.
The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) said it discovered the organisation while investigating alleged fictitious government bodies operating within federal structures. ICPC Chairman Musa Adamu Aliyu said the office had been allocated space within the OSGF without presidential approval, leading President Bola Tinubu to order further action, including the arrest of its promoter, George Buchi Nwabueze.
Nwabueze has denied operating a fake federal agency. His position is that the Made in Nigeria initiative was not established as an independent statutory agency but functioned as a special project connected to the OSGF. Documents reviewed by OtownGist now provide fresh evidence of what appears to have been an official relationship between the project and the government office.
One of the documents, dated June 8, 2026, and carrying the reference number SGF.10/S.4/T²/385, was addressed to the Visa Officer at the Chinese Embassy in Abuja. The letter, titled “Letter of Introduction for Participation of Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation’s Advance Team to Deqing, China for Preparatory Meetings on the China-Africa Summit 2026,” introduced Nwabueze as the “National Coordinator/Chief Executive of the Made in Nigeria Product.” He was listed alongside three OSGF officials nominated for the China trip.
The correspondence stated that the delegation was expected in Deqing from June 15 to 17 for preparatory meetings ahead of a China-Africa summit scheduled for October. A second OSGF letter dated June 10 referred to the earlier communication and added two more officials to the delegation, stating that the visit followed an invitation from authorities in Deqing and would cover logistics, partnership discussions and other preparations for Nigeria’s participation.
The letters raise a straightforward question: if the Made in Nigeria operation had no official relationship with the OSGF, why was its coordinator introduced through OSGF correspondence and included in an official international delegation alongside government officials? The documents, however, do not by themselves establish that the project was legally constituted as a federal agency.
That distinction is important. An official letter recognising an individual, assigning responsibilities or involving a person in a government delegation does not automatically create a statutory government agency. The project also does not appear as a separate federal agency in the 2026 Appropriation Act, a point that could become significant in determining its legal status.
Nwabueze’s representatives have maintained that the project never claimed to be a statutory civil service agency. In a statement issued on August 23, they described it as a public-private special project linked to government policies promoting Nigerian products and domestic manufacturing. They also cited OSGF correspondence referenced as PS-PEAO/2025/008/4, which they said approved a five-member technical committee for monitoring the project’s objectives and public-private implementation arrangements.
Nwabueze has further produced an October 3, 2025, appointment letter that he says designated him National Coordinator and Executive Director of the Made in Nigeria Project Office under the OSGF. His representatives also said he instituted Suit No. CV/2634/26 at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory over a dispute concerning the project’s files and administrative processes.
The emerging evidence therefore leaves two issues that must be separated: whether the Made in Nigeria Special Project Office was legally established as a federal agency, and whether officials within the OSGF formally recognised or worked with the project. The ICPC’s allegations directly challenge the first question, while the newly surfaced letters appear relevant to the second.
The documents cannot, without further authentication and clarification from the OSGF, conclusively determine the project’s legal status. They do, however, raise questions about how an organisation now described by the ICPC as unauthorised was apparently represented in correspondence bearing OSGF credentials and involved in an international assignment with government officials. The investigation will ultimately need to establish what approvals existed, who issued them, what OSGF officials knew, and whether the project operated within the limits of an approved special initiative or crossed into the creation of an unauthorised government body.
