Trailblazer1:
Falana has long lost relevance in the Nigerian polity

When hundreds of Shiites were murdered, our self acclaimed human rights activist lost his voice

The Fulani herdsmen are currently on a killing spree and Falana still can't find his voice

He only has the impetus to attack the likes of NOI, condemn supreme court verdict on Rivers and Akwaibom, praise the same supreme court verdict on Saraki and now attacking Fayose

The once respected human right activist has now become APC RIGHT ACTIVIST


Lost priority

#CommonSense

seunmsg:


The question is, can he be charged for electoral fraud even as an incumbent governor? That is the question Femi Falana tried to answer and I think I agree with his argument. If governors can be charged to court to defend their election, then, it's logical to say they can be charged for electoral fraud irrespective of the immunity clause.

Urine:


You obviously didn't read the article, he cited three cases to back up his argument and quoted a section of the Constitution.

lastpage:


I beg to really INFORM you further...

A Court can over-rule ITSELF........ "IF AND WHEN" NEW EVIDENCE nullifying its earlier position, are brought to life.

Ask Lawyers of repute, if you doubt this.
That is exactly what Falana (SAN) was saying up there.

1.) That investigation's report, with all the accompanying evidence will be placed before that court....it will examine it and then "over-rule itself".
2.)INEC would then vacate Fayose's Governorship post and withdraw his Certificate of return.
3.) He then loses his immunity
4.)Fayose will then be arrested and prosecuted.... based on same evidence.

With the level of "detail" in that evidence..and one Principal accomplice who has come forward and is ready to "sacrifice" his own personal Liberty for that sole purpose (and thereby acting as a State Witness) and the level of "hubris" that Fayose himself has "defecated"....

Anyone that thinks Fayose can still escape this one, is living in a fool's paradise!
AYO FAYOSE IS A GONER.... and it wont be the first time anyway!
I thought his wife that he smashed her mouth to pieces, already told her about it, in the dream she had.


But then, lets not jump the gun.
Time will tell.


Lastpage!

Well said.

There are tapes, and now witnesses -- Fayose won't find this funny, unless he finds a way to make either the tapes disappear, or the witnesses disappear. He is good at making people disappear though . . . whatever happened to his previous murder case?

TheFreeOne:
I beg to disagree. Fayose guber election has been laid to rest at the supreme court.

As for those who still believed Fayose rigged, I say they are on a long thing cos should that election be conducted again with Tinubu or Buhari as candidates it will still be a landslide for oshokomole.

The undeniable fact: Fayose is a grassroot politician, very popular and acceptable to his people.

Bigchief46:

And you Sir, obviously didn't read the cases he quoted. Prople are so lazy these days. I was actually trying to resist the temptation of entering an argument on legal issues with people whose background I don't know but for the fact that others may be misled into thinking there is anything of substance in the rubbish Falana is spewing. Our Constitution is available everywhere & every educated Nigerian should have a copy whether or not you are a Lawyer but as I said earlier, many people who comment are too lazy to even make the effort to take a look & see for themselves what the particular Sections of it being discussed says. To demonstrate the complete irrelevance of the cases mischievously referred to by Falana that has got some people dancing up & down like people with Zika virus, let me take the trouble of first setting down what S. 308 (1) of the Constitution says; after all this Forum should also be for educational purposes & not only for insults. S. 308: "(a) no civil or criminal proceedings shall be instituted or continued against a person to whom this section applies during his period of office; (b) a person to whom this section applies shall not be arrested or imprisoned during that period either in pursuance of the process of any court or otherwise; and (c) no process of any court requiring or compelling the appearance of a person to whom this section applies, shall be applied or issued"
NOTE THAT THESE PROVISIONS ARE MANDATORY, CLEAR & UNEQUIVOCAL. The Constitution is the Grundnorm.
To understand what was being said in the said cases our LEARNED SILK is using to confuse the public, I will simply illustrate thus. In 2003, President Obasanjo who was a sitting President was sued & served processes by Buhari in the election Tribunal and he answered to the Petition even though he had immunity. S. 308(1) is not an defence in this instance. Goodluck Jonathan while in office was also sued in Courts other than Election Tribunals over his qualification to contest again in 2015 for several reasons. As we speak, Buhari who is a sitting President & enjoys immunity has several cases pending against him at the Federal High Court over his lack of the basic educational qualification (WASC) to hold the office of President (in which incidentally Falana is one of his Defence Counsels) & the immunity clause enshrined by S. 308(1) of the Constitution is not a defence. The cases quoted by Falana which arose early in our current Presidential system of Government simply makes an exception to the immunity clause in respect of suits or proceedings questioning the eligibility of a person to hold the office which has conferred the immunity in him in the first place. That is the only exception. The issue of Fayose's election has been conclusively & FINALLY determined; it cannot be revisited again by any court. Fayose enjoys complete immunity in respect of the issues arising from the Military panel. In fact, even ordinary "bloody civilians" like me cannot be tried in a Military Tribunal. As for those bringing in EFCC in matters of ALLEGED RIGGING of Ekiti elections, your ignorance knows no limit
NOTE: there is a world of difference between the person declared winner of an election being sued at the Election Tribunal to invalidate his return & a person being charged for electoral fraud. An Election Petition does not charge anyone for Electoral fraud, even if allegations of corrupt practices or non-compliance are made therein; rather it challenges the results of the election declared by INEC on any or a combination of the 4 grounds set out at S. 138(1) of the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended). The allegations of rigging, corrupt practices & non-compliance in the Ekiti elections have already been heard & dismissed by the Supreme Court & that is it. People should stop dreaming of it being revisited again. The judicial system does not work that way

989900:


Is this true for all cases, even when new overwhelming evidences do surface?

989900:


Is this true for all cases, even when new overwhelming evidences do surface?

Bigchief46:
I can't believe that Falana of all people says that any Governor at all including Fayose can be prosecuted while still in office and protected by the Constitutional immunity clause. Anyway, he did not refer to any Section of the Constitution or other law or any Judicial precedent where such a thing has ever happened. It is astonishing what partisanship can do to an otherwise brilliant Lawyer. Or maybe it is arrogance which leads him to think he can just open his mouth, say whatever catches his fancy and bamboozle the public. Smh

TimeManager:
I officially nominate keneking as a mod, perhaps in an assisting capacity, or how can you explain some news worthy makes the FP long after breaking while some garbage makes the FP in quick time. How long shall keneking continually wakes lalasticalala up to his duty? Do well to consider this thought.
The truth has spoken!

chukwudi44:


To avoid lengthy duration of election cases that saw some illegally elected Governors staying in office for up to 2 years before their elections were upturned,the electoral act was amended to set a time limitations for all the electoral disputes to be resolved by the courts.That duration has since elapsed in respect of the ekiti elections.The Fayose election cannot be revisited by any court whatsorever.The supreme court's judgement on the matter last april sounded the death knell on the election.

Furthermore besides words of mouth there is no strong evidence yet to prove that the elections were rigged.There is nothing to indicate falsification of results by INEC,ballot papers snatching etc!!

Thanks Pa' . . . where you go hide before?

OTOH, he can be indicted on some other premise with this new revelations once he loses immunity; or not?

Bigchief46:

Yes Sir, and not just in Nigeria but all over the world. It is not just a matter of judicial policy but of public policy as well. There must be an end to litigation. It will create chaos & upheaval if litigants can keep re-litigating an issue ad infinitum each time they wake up & say they have new evidence. There is no known precedence for it in Nigeria. Those talking about the Supreme Court or any Court reversing itself do not know what they are talking about. There are a VERY FEW instances where the Supreme Court can reverse itself on a PRINCIPLE OF LAW BUT NOT on a decision already entered in a case. For instance, the Supreme Court in 2007 declared Rotimi Amaechi winner of the elections as candidate of the PDP even though he never contested the general elections which was contested & won on the platform of the PDP by Celestine Omehia. However, if today, another case on all fours with that one comes before the Supreme Court, they will decide differently based on new facts now before them. The new fact being that after the Amaechi case, the Electoral Act was amended in 2010 with a specific provision inserted vide Section 141 thereof that under no circumstances can any Court declare anyone as winner of an election in which that person did not participate in all stages of the election. You will notice that even though this amendment was made while Amaechi was still in his first term, no one went to court to canvass that because of this new fact of enactment of S. 141 of the Electoral Act, Amaechi's case should be revisited by the Supreme Court & he be disqualified. This is because once the Supreme Court has entered a decision on that very case, it is final. But the Supreme Court as I said can reverse the principle it enunciated in the Amaechi case in another similar case which comes before it.
Another way the Supreme Court or any other Court can reverse itself can be described in this analogy. Let us assume that Fayose contested against the candidates of APC, APGA, KOWA, etc and that what the Sup. Court decided was the case brought by the APC candidate. Let us assume that there is another election Petition by the APGA candidate still pending (which is not possible because of limitation period); let us assume that the APGA candidate can amend his Petition to include the new evidence (which is not allowed in Election Petitions anyway), then if the APGA case finally reaches the Sup. Court, they can reach a different decision from that in the case by the APC candidate based on the new facts; so you could have a "reversal" in that sense. But then again it will not really be a case of reversal but one of proof: the APC could not prove their allegations of rigging, fraud, etc but APGA provided proof (even if it was by the "new evidence). Then you will have a situation where the SC will say there was no rigging in Ekiti in the APC case only to come later in the APGA case to say there was rigging in Ekiti & members of the public (particularly PDP ) will go hay-wire cursing the SC out of ignorance. Mind you, even if the case by APC was still pending before the SC when the "new evidence" came to light, the SC will pay no attention to it in so far as it was not tendered at the trial Court (Tribunal) & comes before them through the Records of Appeal. There is only a very narrow window in which the SC will consider fresh evidence not first tendered & considered by the Courts below. The duty of the SC & appellate Courts is to review what the Courts below did & determine whether or not they were right. An issue or evidence that was never before or considered by the lower Courts cannot be considered by the SC. The problem is that people don't realize that litigation is circumscribed by very technical rules; it is not your typical town union or neighborhood arbitration

An issue or evidence that was never before or considered by the lower Courts cannot be considered by the SC.

989900:


Is this true for all cases, even when new overwhelming evidences do surface?

TheFreeOne:


You deserve another ban.

JayJohnson:


Bros, you baddd gon. Nnamadi Kanu don enter one chance
Remember that Kanu is the Jesus of Biaf*raud

Blitz888:
Dude is innocent until proven otherwise...

Bigchief46:

Yes Sir, and not just in Nigeria but all over the world. It is not just a matter of judicial policy but of public policy as well. There must be an end to litigation. It will create chaos & upheaval if litigants can keep re-litigating an issue ad infinitum each time they wake up & say they have new evidence. There is no known precedence for it in Nigeria. Those talking about the Supreme Court or any Court reversing itself do not know what they are talking about. There are a VERY FEW instances where the Supreme Court can reverse itself on a PRINCIPLE OF LAW BUT NOT on a decision already entered in a case. For instance, the Supreme Court in 2007 declared Rotimi Amaechi winner of the elections as candidate of the PDP even though he never contested the general elections which was contested & won on the platform of the PDP by Celestine Omehia. However, if today, another case on all fours with that one comes before the Supreme Court, they will decide differently based on new facts now before them. The new fact being that after the Amaechi case, the Electoral Act was amended in 2010 with a specific provision inserted vide Section 141 thereof that under no circumstances can any Court declare anyone as winner of an election in which that person did not participate in all stages of the election. You will notice that even though this amendment was made while Amaechi was still in his first term, no one went to court to canvass that because of this new fact of enactment of S. 141 of the Electoral Act, Amaechi's case should be revisited by the Supreme Court & he be disqualified. This is because once the Supreme Court has entered a decision on that very case, it is final. But the Supreme Court as I said can reverse the principle it enunciated in the Amaechi case in another similar case which comes before it.
Another way the Supreme Court or any other Court can reverse itself can be described in this analogy. Let us assume that Fayose contested against the candidates of APC, APGA, KOWA, etc and that what the Sup. Court decided was the case brought by the APC candidate. Let us assume that there is another election Petition by the APGA candidate still pending (which is not possible because of limitation period); let us assume that the APGA candidate can amend his Petition to include the new evidence (which is not allowed in Election Petitions anyway), then if the APGA case finally reaches the Sup. Court, they can reach a different decision from that in the case by the APC candidate based on the new facts; so you could have a "reversal" in that sense. But then again it will not really be a case of reversal but one of proof: the APC could not prove their allegations of rigging, fraud, etc but APGA provided proof (even if it was by the "new evidence). Then you will have a situation where the SC will say there was no rigging in Ekiti in the APC case only to come later in the APGA case to say there was rigging in Ekiti & members of the public (particularly PDP ) will go hay-wire cursing the SC out of ignorance. Mind you, even if the case by APC was still pending before the SC when the "new evidence" came to light, the SC will pay no attention to it in so far as it was not tendered at the trial Court (Tribunal) & comes before them through the Records of Appeal. There is only a very narrow window in which the SC will consider fresh evidence not first tendered & considered by the Courts below. The duty of the SC & appellate Courts is to review what the Courts below did & determine whether or not they were right. An issue or evidence that was never before or considered by the lower Courts cannot be considered by the SC. The problem is that people don't realize that litigation is circumscribed by very technical rules; it is not your typical town union or neighborhood arbitration

989900:


Quite educative -- especially the latter part.

The below: never, ever?


The Ameachi's case looks different though.

Thanks . . .

OTOH, Fayose can be indicted on some other premise with this new revelations once he loses immunity; or not?

Realhommie:
Very informed... We seem to have derailed as a nation in the aspect of understanding.. Some people make comments either coz they are consumed by hate or they lack understanding. One of such is @Trailblazer1, my take is that he is just being blinded by hate for whatever reason best known to him... Dude is just not making sense. Tanx once again for this detailed explanation to enlighten us bro.

Trailblazer1:

Get lost

Trailblazer1:
Falana has long lost relevance in the Nigerian polity

When hundreds of Shiites were murdered, our self acclaimed human rights activist lost his voice

The Fulani herdsmen are currently on a killing spree and Falana still can't find his voice

He only has the impetus to attack the likes of NOI, condemn supreme court verdict on Rivers and Akwaibom, praise the same supreme court verdict on Saraki and now attacking Fayose

The once respected human right activist has now become APC RIGHT ACTIVIST


Lost priority

#CommonSense

odeotito:


Are you cocksure he said so? Hmmmm!
My drift was to emphasise the need for preaching to hit hard at the barely concealed malfeasance of our politicians who visit places of worship as a matter of duty maybe. They might just repent.
The failure to do so does not necessarily make the preachers"fake" as you say. It could make them appear less responsible to God who someday will hold them accountable for the grace they received while in the collar.

TheFreeOne:
I beg to disagree. Fayose guber election has been laid to rest at the supreme court.

As for those who still believed Fayose rigged, I say they are on a long thing cos should that election be conducted again with Tinubu or Buhari as candidates it will still be a landslide for oshokomole.

The undeniable fact: Fayose is a grassroot politician, very popular and acceptable to his people.