Reported by Simon Daniel Yusuph l Journalist at Weng Global
The arrest of five men in Maiduguri, Borno State, over T-shirts bearing the inscription “Tinubu Must Go” has drawn attention after police accused them of offences including criminal conspiracy, inciting disturbance, disturbance of public peace and thuggery.
The case centres on an incident reported to have occurred around the West End Roundabout area of Maiduguri on September 25, 2026.
According to a First Information Report issued by the State Criminal Investigation Department in Maiduguri and dated September 29, the police alleged that the five men had conspired to print T-shirts carrying the message “Tinubu Must Go” with the intention of causing a breach of public peace.
The five defendants were identified as Baba Aji Gremami, 44; Mustapha Abba Yemen, 28; Abbacha Mohammed Ali, 32; Adam Umar Gubio, 21; and Abdulhamid Mohammed, 21.
What the Police Alleged
The police case, as reported from the FIR, does not simply identify the wearing of the T-shirts as the only issue before the court.
The prosecution alleges that the men acted together to print the shirts and that their conduct was intended to cause a disturbance within the West End Roundabout community.
The charges reportedly include criminal conspiracy, inciting disturbance, disturbance of public peace and thuggery under Sections 60, 78, 79 and 392 of the Borno State Penal Code.
The case therefore involves allegations about the circumstances and alleged intention surrounding the production and use of the shirts, rather than an established finding that the defendants committed those offences.
The allegations have yet to be determined by the court.
No Confirmed Drug Possession Charge in the FIR
Some descriptions of the arrest have suggested that the five men were also arrested over alleged drug possession.
However, the First Information Report cited in current reports lists criminal conspiracy, inciting disturbance, disturbance of public peace and thuggery. The available reporting and FIR reviewed by Weng Global do not establish a separate drug-possession charge against the five defendants.
That distinction is important because criminal allegations should be reported according to the documented charges rather than assumptions or information that cannot be independently established.
The men remain defendants in a case whose allegations are subject to judicial determination.
The Five Defendants
The five men named in the police document are Baba Aji Gremami, Mustapha Abba Yemen, Abbacha Mohammed Ali, Adam Umar Gubio and Abdulhamid Mohammed.
Reports on the court proceedings indicate that the defendants appeared before Chief Magistrate Court I in Maiduguri and pleaded not guilty to the charges.
Their lawyers subsequently sought bail.
The matter was reportedly adjourned to October 6, 2026, for a ruling on the bail application, while the substantive case was scheduled for October 26, 2026.
The court proceedings will determine how the allegations against the defendants are handled under the applicable law.
What Does “Tinubu Must Go” Mean?
The words printed on the T-shirts are a political slogan expressing opposition to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
The phrase has appeared in political demonstrations and opposition activities in Nigeria as political groups and individuals debate the performance of the current administration and the country’s direction ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The slogan itself is a political expression. The legal question in the Borno case, however, concerns the specific conduct alleged by the police and whether the prosecution can establish the offences charged before the court.
This distinction is significant in reporting the case because the presence of a political message on clothing does not, by itself, establish that the wearer committed the criminal offences listed in the charge.
Nigeria’s Constitutional Protection of Expression
Freedom of expression is protected under Section 39 of Nigeria’s Constitution.
The provision states that every person is entitled to freedom of expression, including the freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference.
The Constitution also provides for freedom of peaceful assembly and association under Section 40.
Those rights are not without limitations. The Constitution recognises circumstances in which laws may impose restrictions that meet its stated requirements.
Consequently, the legal significance of the Borno case will depend not simply on the political message displayed on the T-shirts but on the evidence concerning the specific offences with which the defendants have been charged.
Amnesty International Raises Concerns
Amnesty International has criticised the prosecution of the five men.
The organisation argued that wearing clothing expressing political dissent should not in itself constitute a criminal offence and called on the authorities to release the men and drop the charges.
Amnesty’s position represents a human-rights assessment of the case and should be distinguished from the allegations contained in the police charge.
The police case, meanwhile, is based on its allegation that the defendants’ conduct was connected to an intended breach of public peace.
The competing positions highlight the central issue surrounding the case: whether the conduct alleged by the police amounts to offences under Borno State law or whether the prosecution improperly criminalises political expression.
That question remains for the relevant legal process.
Police Response and Public Information
Reports published on September 30 said the Borno State Police Command had not issued a separate public statement explaining the arrests in detail.
Premium Times reported that it contacted the Borno police spokesperson, Nahum Daso, for comment but had not received a response at the time of publication.
As a result, the FIR remains the principal documented basis for the details concerning the charges reported in the case.
Weng Global could not independently establish claims beyond the documented allegations and reported court proceedings.
Political Context
The arrests have occurred as political activity increases ahead of Nigeria’s 2027 general elections.
President Tinubu is expected to face opposition candidates and political groups seeking to challenge the governing political establishment at the next presidential election.
In Borno, the political environment is also significant because Governor Babagana Umara Zulum is a prominent member of the All Progressives Congress, the party controlling the federal government.
Reports have linked recent political mobilisation in the state to preparations for the 2027 elections.
However, claims that the five men’s arrests were ordered for political reasons remain allegations unless independently established through official evidence or judicial findings.
A report by Premium Times noted that an allegation concerning a directive from Governor Zulum had circulated, but the Borno State Police Command had not publicly confirmed that claim.
Why the Case Matters
The case raises questions about the boundary between political expression and public-order offences in Nigeria.
Political disagreement is a normal feature of an electoral democracy, but authorities also have responsibilities concerning public safety and the prevention of criminal conduct.
The challenge for law-enforcement agencies is therefore to distinguish between peaceful political expression and conduct that meets the legal requirements of a criminal offence.
For citizens, the case also illustrates the importance of understanding the difference between being arrested, being charged and being convicted.
An arrest does not establish guilt. A charge represents an allegation that must be tested through the legal process.
In the Borno case, the defendants’ not-guilty pleas mean the allegations remain contested.
Human Rights Groups and Political Dissent
The reaction from Amnesty International has placed the case within a broader discussion about political dissent and freedom of expression.
Nigeria’s constitutional framework protects expression and opinion, while the country’s human-rights institutions have also recognised the importance of those freedoms to democratic participation.
International human-rights standards similarly protect freedom of opinion and expression, while allowing certain restrictions under defined circumstances.
The existence of these protections does not automatically determine the outcome of a particular criminal case.
Instead, courts must consider the facts, the applicable law and the evidence presented by the prosecution and defence.
What Happens Next
The immediate development to watch is the court’s consideration of the defendants’ bail application.
Reports indicate that the ruling on bail has been scheduled for October 6, 2026, while the substantive case has been listed for October 26.
The proceedings could provide further details about the evidence relied upon by the prosecution and the defence’s response to the allegations.
The court process will also provide an opportunity for the defendants to challenge the charges and for the prosecution to present evidence supporting its case.
Until the matter is determined, the allegations against the five men should not be treated as established facts.
The Key Issue
The Borno case is not accurately described simply as an arrest because five men wore shirts criticising President Tinubu.
The police allegation, according to the FIR reported by multiple news organisations, is that the men conspired to print and use the shirts with an alleged intention to cause a breach of public peace, leading to charges including criminal conspiracy, inciting disturbance, disturbance of public peace and thuggery.
At the same time, the political message on the shirts has made the case a matter of wider public interest because it intersects with constitutional protections for expression and the increasingly active political environment ahead of the 2027 elections.
The available evidence reviewed by Weng Global does not establish the separate claim that the men were charged with drug possession.
The next stages of the court proceedings will therefore be important in establishing what evidence the prosecution relies upon and how the defendants respond.
For readers, the essential distinction is clear: the five men have been accused, not convicted, and the court remains the appropriate forum for determining whether the allegations against them have been proved.
Weng global – stories beyond borders
Sources
First Information Report issued by the State Criminal Investigation Department, Maiduguri
Borno State Police Command
Premium Times
Trust Radio
Amnesty International
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria
National Human Rights Commission
