Bauchi Mosque Removes Imam for Campaigning for Tinubu’s 2027 Re-Election, Rejects Plan to Rename Mosque After President

A mosque committee in Bauchi metropolis has removed Imam Dahiru Abubakar from his position following allegations that he repeatedly used religious gatherings to promote President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s re-election bid ahead of the 2027 general elections.

The decision reportedly followed repeated warnings against bringing political activities into the mosque, with the committee insisting that the place of worship must remain dedicated to religious activities rather than partisan mobilisation.

According to a report published by Naija News on Thursday, 22 October 2026, the imam served at Masjid Abdullahi Bin Zubbair in Madina Quarters, Bauchi metropolis, where he allegedly urged worshippers to support Tinubu for another presidential term.

The controversy has also drawn attention to a reported proposal by the imam to rename the mosque after the president, an idea the mosque committee rejected.

The development highlights a wider question about the relationship between religious leadership and political participation in Nigeria, particularly as political activities begin to intensify ahead of the 2027 elections.

Why the Mosque Committee Removed the Imam

According to the report, Imam Abubakar repeatedly defended President Tinubu during comments made after obligatory prayers, arguing that the president should not be blamed entirely for Nigeria’s insecurity and economic difficulties.

The imam reportedly encouraged worshippers to support Tinubu for another term in 2027, maintaining that the country’s challenges required prayers and divine intervention rather than placing all responsibility on the president.

His position, however, allegedly conflicted with the expectations of the mosque committee, which had reportedly warned him against using the religious institution as a platform for political discussions.

The chairman of the committee, Imam Abubakar Jibrin, said the decision to remove the imam was not based solely on his support for Tinubu. He also accused him of gathering people around the mosque to discuss politics and sometimes entering the premises specifically for political conversations.

According to Jibrin, the committee had issued repeated warnings before deciding that Abubakar should no longer serve as the mosque’s imam.

The committee reportedly maintained that political discussions and mobilisation should take place through appropriate political platforms rather than being incorporated into the activities of a place of worship.

Imam Defends His Position on Tinubu

In his response, Abubakar reportedly acknowledged making comments encouraging worshippers to stop blaming Tinubu for Nigeria’s security and economic problems.

He argued that insecurity was not unique to Nigeria, citing crises in other African countries, including Sudan, Chad and Mali, as examples of challenges that could not simply be attributed to one political leader.

The former imam reportedly described the difficulties facing the country as part of what he called an “end times phenomenon”, stressing the importance of faith, fear of God and prayer.

His position appeared to be that Nigerians should avoid holding the president solely responsible for every national problem and should instead pray for divine intervention.

However, the disagreement illustrates the difficulty that can arise when religious leaders move from discussing governance and national challenges to explicitly encouraging support for a particular political candidate.

Religious leaders have considerable influence among their congregations. Their comments on public affairs can shape how worshippers understand political developments, government performance and their responsibilities as citizens.

That influence makes the distinction between offering moral guidance on governance and actively campaigning for a candidate an important issue for religious institutions to consider.

Mosque Committee Rejects Proposal to Rename Mosque After Tinubu

Another major aspect of the dispute was the reported proposal to change the name of Masjid Abdullahi Bin Zubbair to Masjid Imam Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

The committee chairman said the proposal was rejected because the mosque belonged to the community and its identity should not be altered to honour a political figure.

The committee reportedly resolved to retain the existing name, emphasising that the institution was not established as a platform for promoting any political candidate.

Jibrin also maintained that the committee was not opposed to Tinubu or any other presidential aspirant. Instead, he said its concern was preserving the mosque’s religious purpose and preventing partisan activities from disrupting its functions.

The rejection of the proposal reinforces the committee’s position that a community religious institution should not be identified with the political ambitions of an individual leader.

It also raises questions about ownership, governance and decision-making within religious institutions, especially where disagreements emerge between an imam and the committee responsible for overseeing a mosque.

Religion and Politics Ahead of the 2027 Elections

The incident comes as political parties and their supporters begin positioning themselves ahead of the 2027 general elections.

In Nigeria, religious institutions occupy an influential place in community life. Churches and mosques are often venues where people discuss national issues, economic hardship, insecurity, leadership and the moral direction of society.

Religious leaders may legitimately address these matters, including the performance of elected officials and the responsibilities of citizens. However, explicitly using a religious platform to promote a particular candidate can create disagreements among worshippers who hold different political views.

A congregation may include supporters of different parties, people who remain undecided and individuals who prefer to keep politics separate from their religious activities.

When an imam or pastor appears to use religious authority to advance a particular political interest, some members may feel that their place of worship no longer provides a neutral environment for collective spiritual life.

On the other hand, religious leaders retain their personal rights to hold political opinions and participate in public debate, subject to applicable laws and the legitimate rules governing their institutions.

The central challenge is finding a balance between freedom of expression, responsible religious leadership and the need to maintain trust within a diverse congregation.

Should Religious Leaders Endorse Political Candidates During Worship?

The Bauchi controversy raises an important question: should religious leaders use sermons and gatherings for political endorsements?

There is a distinction between discussing political issues and campaigning for a particular candidate.

A religious leader can urge elected officials to address insecurity, reduce hardship, protect citizens and govern responsibly without necessarily instructing worshippers to support a particular political party or candidate.

Similarly, a mosque committee can insist that its premises remain focused on worship without declaring opposition to a particular politician.

The approach adopted by the Bauchi committee reflects its stated preference for separating political mobilisation from mosque activities. Whether similar rules apply elsewhere depends on the governance arrangements of each religious institution and the applicable legal framework.

Ultimately, religious institutions must consider how their decisions affect the unity of their congregations. Clear rules, consistent enforcement and respectful dialogue can help prevent political disagreements from escalating into prolonged institutional disputes.

What the Development Means for Tinubu’s Re-Election Campaign

Although the incident does not establish any broader shift in public opinion towards Tinubu, it demonstrates that support for a political leader can become contentious even within religious communities.

The reported removal of the imam should not automatically be interpreted as opposition to Tinubu by the mosque committee. Its chairman explicitly stated that the committee was not against any candidate.

Rather, the dispute appears to centre on the committee’s objections to political activities within the mosque and the reported proposal to rename the institution after the president.

For Tinubu and other presidential aspirants, the development serves as a reminder that political support from religious figures may not always be welcomed by the institutions in which they serve.

The 2027 contest is likely to generate further discussions about the role of religious leaders, community institutions and influential public figures in shaping political choices.

However, voters’ decisions will ultimately depend on a range of considerations, including security, economic conditions, governance, public trust and the performance of political candidates.

The removal of Imam Dahiru Abubakar by a mosque committee in Bauchi has brought the relationship between religion and partisan politics into focus ahead of Nigeria’s 2027 presidential election.

According to the reports, the committee objected to repeated political discussions and appeals for Tinubu’s re-election within the mosque, while also rejecting a proposal to rename the institution after the president.

The committee has maintained that its decision was not an endorsement of or opposition to any presidential candidate, but an effort to preserve the mosque’s religious purpose.

The development offers a broader lesson for religious institutions and political actors: political disagreements should be handled through dialogue, established rules and respect for institutional responsibilities.

As Nigeria approaches another election cycle, maintaining trust within religious communities will require sensitivity to the different political views of worshippers and a clear understanding of the boundaries between spiritual leadership and partisan campaigning.