Tinubu Must Stay: How Kashifu Inuwa Is Giving the Opposition a Run for Its Money

Abdulkezo IkonAllah

Political movements gain strength when their opponents leave the public space uncontested. A slogan gathers attention, becomes a rallying point and, through repetition, begins to sound like the only voice in the room. Challenging that momentum requires organisation, persuasive engagement and the ability to bring new people into a common cause.

These are the tasks Kashifu Inuwa Abdullahi has taken on through the Tinubu Must Stay movement.

Known principally as Director-General of the National Information Technology Development Agency, NITDA, Inuwa is demonstrating another dimension of leadership: building alliances and organising a political response to those campaigning against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s continuation in office.

His contribution deserves examination through the practical steps he has taken. Recent developments reveal a strategy built around coalition building, leadership recruitment, community engagement and a more organised defence of the administration.

One of the clearest examples is the alliance between Tinubu Must Stay and the Directorate of Mobilisation and Integration, DMI, led by Marcel Ngogbehei, a former organiser within the movement that supported Peter Obi’s presidential campaign in 2023. According to reporting on the agreement, the partnership followed discussions between Inuwa and Ngogbehei in London and received approval from the leadership of both organisations.

The political significance is considerable. Inuwa has reached beyond an established circle of presidential supporters to secure cooperation with an organiser whose experience includes mobilising for a rival presidential candidate. That is a concrete achievement in coalition building.

It challenges the assumption that political loyalties formed during the last election must remain fixed ahead of the next. It also demonstrates the value of personal engagement: conversations across political divides can produce organisational agreements with consequences beyond the meeting room.

For a movement seeking to counter “Tinubu Must Go,” this is an important advance. A campaign for the President’s departure now faces a competing platform capable of attracting people with experience in opposition mobilisation.

The London engagement also illustrates Inuwa’s willingness to pursue partnerships beyond Nigeria’s borders. Its documented outcome—the DMI alliance—provides a firmer measure of achievement than the publicity surrounding any political gathering. He emerged with a partnership approved by the participating organisations and subsequently given a leadership structure.

That next step came with the appointment of Ngogbehei as director-general of the TMS–DMI alliance. Announcing the appointment, Inuwa cited his longstanding knowledge of Ngogbehei’s abilities and professional experience. The appointment placed responsibility for organisational coordination and grassroots engagement in the hands of an experienced campaign organiser.

This matters because political agreements require people who can implement them. The appointment gives the alliance an operational centre and someone accountable for turning its intentions into activity.

Inuwa’s achievement, therefore, extends beyond attracting a prominent ally. He has helped establish a working arrangement through which that ally’s experience can serve the movement.

The inauguration of the national leadership of the Tinubu Movement for Sustainable Governance Foundation provides another indication of this organisational approach. Reports identify Inuwa as chairman and national coordinator of the platform, popularly known as Tinubu Must Stay, with a stated mission of promoting policy continuity and public understanding of the administration’s reforms.

A national leadership structure gives a political movement the means to coordinate its message, assign responsibilities and sustain engagement. It also creates an identifiable platform through which supporters can participate.

Taken together, the alliance, leadership recruitment and national inauguration suggest an effort to turn a declaration of support into an organised political presence. This is where Inuwa’s work presents a substantive challenge to the campaign for Tinubu’s removal: it gives the opposing argument people, structures and channels through which to compete.

His community engagement adds another dimension.

In Hadejia, Jigawa State, an empowerment initiative facilitated by Inuwa provided assistance to women and young people. PRNigeria reported support including cash grants, business materials, agricultural inputs and educational assistance across successive rounds of the initiative. Members of Tinubu Must Stay volunteered during the Hadejia distribution, linking the movement’s community presence with an intervention intended to improve livelihoods.

The distinction is important: the initiative was reported as facilitated by Inuwa, with TMS members participating; it should not automatically be presented as a programme funded or delivered exclusively by the movement.

Nevertheless, that participation has political relevance. It creates opportunities for direct contact with communities and allows supporters to associate their advocacy with practical service. For citizens facing economic pressure, engagement becomes more meaningful when it includes attention to their immediate needs.

There is also a developing communications strategy. Reporting on the foundation’s inauguration describes plans for virtual town halls, physical grassroots outreach and explanations of economic policies in language that communities can understand. These remain commitments whose implementation will need to be assessed, but they indicate the direction Inuwa wants the organisation to take.

The approach recognises a central political problem: government policies do not explain themselves. Supporters must connect decisions taken in Abuja with the questions citizens ask in their homes, workplaces and markets. They must also listen closely enough to communicate public concerns back to government.

Has all this checkmated “Tinubu Must Go”?

What can reasonably be argued is that Inuwa is building a counterweight. His movement has secured an alliance involving a former opposition organiser, recruited experienced leadership, established a national structure and participated in community outreach. These are identifiable developments that strengthen the organisational response to anti-Tinubu campaigning.

In that sense, the checkmating lies in contesting political space, challenging assumptions about permanent opposition loyalties and ensuring that calls for the President’s departure encounter an organised answer.

The next test will be whether these gains translate into sustained participation and broader public confidence. Political visibility must eventually produce effective engagement, while arguments for continuity must remain connected to the administration’s delivery.

For now, Kashifu Inuwa has demonstrated that defending a presidency requires work beyond issuing statements. Through negotiation, recruitment and organisation, he is helping supporters of Tinubu find a more coordinated voice.

That is the significance of his role in Tinubu Must Stay: he is giving the campaign for continuity a structure with which to challenge its opponents—and making clear that the political conversation ahead of 2027 will be vigorously contested.