junketer:
If only this woman can go to america and come back i will personal sue fayose and hire 20 SANS to represent. Woman just go to america. How difficult is that for you? Wetin dey worry buhari and his wife sef? Bring certificate, you carry SANS come. Go to america and come back you dey go court. Ha

?Alll

How shameful would it be to see the 1st lady of the Giant of Africa, being arrested in America, please let us be reasonable and see the larger picture. It is not only about Aisha, it is about how the world would perceive us... I am sure when the swearing in of the new American president takes place whether it be Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton.. If Hillary wins Aisha might be persuaded to risk it if given personal assurance that she would not be arrested, if Donald Trump no matter the assurance she would not even dare even take a connecting flight that must go through the USA.

Aisha please go for summer shopping and put all the haters to shame!
Least i forget, please include Atiku in your entourage!!!

junketer:
If only this woman can go to america and come back i will personal sue fayose and hire 20 SANS to represent. Woman just go to america. How difficult is that for you? Wetin dey worry buhari and his wife sef? Bring certificate, you carry SANS come. Go to america and come back you dey go court. Ha

Go to America when she has no business there? The same way you have been going from Ikeja City Mall, to Lagos City Mall Onikan, to Onitsha Shopping Mall, to Owerri Mall all for window shopping.

erico2k2:

But she will never go to America or she do not come back, do not under estimate the western world, learn from Ibori case.

It is not really Americans she is worried about, but the Nigerians living in America, that would start filing petition upon her plane landing any where in America... Just too risky for Aisha!

Sheggy13:

How about the guy suing the President himself for certificate issues, and that case was not put in abeyance but ongoing instead. Who else enjoys immunity more than the President? Please enlighten me.

Oh, that. The case was a pre election case that touched on the eligibility of the president to contest for that office. There are so many pre and post election matters instituted against sitting Governors. Suffice it to remind you that the case against Mr. President has been withdrawn.

Aristo3146:
Anytime a person Quotes me, I first of all view his/her profile pix to see if he/she is matured enough to waste my time...You dont have a profile pix, let me give you a benefit of doubt by assuming you are matured.

Back to the topic, You said section 135 made it clear and unambiguous," No court action can be initiated against a sitting governor" If i may ask...Do you know how many governors/ past governors that are facing/faced certificate forgery cases in court why they were/are still covered by immunity clause?
Do you think the lawyer that sued Buhari over certificate scandal never knew what he was doing? or you dont know that the president also enjoys immunity like governors...
My dear, we have laws and we still have laws that governs the laws...

My dear, I am a very mature fellow both in mind and physically and that is why I only engage myself in academic and thought provoking discussions. I am not here to prove that I am super intelligent or anything of that sort.

Back to the topic. Pre and post election matters or matters touching on the eligibility of a sitting governor to contest elections are exceptions. There are so many cases to cite in that regard.

StOla:


No!

The same mouth Fayose used to create doubt about an Aisha Buhari character in the USA that had been long revealed when the present first lady was just a private citizen in Kaduna, that same mouth of his would be used to clear the doubt.

You nor Fayose do not tell her when or where to travel to. She does not report to you and do not owe you a visit to the USA. Fayose however owes the courts the facts of his accusations.

If Fayose can prove his accusations in court, it would be to her shame. If Fayose cannot prove his accusations in court, then it will serve as a teachable moment for all Nigerians that love to propagate false information just to damage the image of another person.

Stop begging for Fayose. He has been presented with a rare opportunity to deal with Buhari and his wife, let him go to court and make his supporters proud.

Which court,buhari's court? A dictator is usually the court where he holds. sway, a neutral arbitar like the us would have been better

All is well.[i][/i]

ganisucks:
She should visit the US and clear all doubts, period.

If she go to USA, u also will be among people shouting "they are using our money to travel around"..

Like seriously, you guys should just chill, if she is guilty, will she still sue Fayose when she know it will only expose her the more... Common sense.

Don't just let hatred fill your head to the extent of blocking your sense of thinking..

cktheluckyman:


I am more interested in Aisha proving her innocense by travelling to the US.What is difficult in that of she is innocent

So she should go to USA without a specific reason but to proof someone wrong?? A first lady for that matter... Like How did you people even think this days

She a fool d name on that report is Aisha Buhari so has she change her name

Cope1:
Them say if person no be man, he go pull him clothes show them him pr*ck.
So aisha should travel to US and spare us this charade of going to court

She need justice.

ganisucks:
I blame every Nigerian, for this distraction. We have a US fugitive occuping and desecrating the office of wife of the President, and we are taking it lightly.

Go and bundle her out of the villa ,Mtchww

Mrs Aisha just want to create a lagacy for herself.

Beer parlour is better than a nigerian court.

StOla:


A visit to the USA will not prosecute Fayose for his libellous crime.
What she is doing is taking Fayose to the legal arena where he can either prove his allegations or condemn himself.

The court is not a place for beer parlour talk, Fayose will have to bring his facts for the accusation he has made.
Fayose would explain to the courts when he became the FBI operative in Nigeria, and when the FBI disclosed that they are investigating the Aisha Buhari that is resident in Nigeria not USA, and is the wife and not Daughter of the president.

He has asked for a burden, let him carry it with the eagerness at which his mouth moves.

junketer:
If only this woman can go to america and come back i will personal sue fayose and hire 20 SANS to represent. Woman just go to america. How difficult is that for you? Wetin dey worry buhari and his wife sef? Bring certificate, you carry SANS come. Go to america and come back you dey go court. Ha

if 10 people say u av committed an offense and dey say individually u shld travel to 10 different countries to proof ur innocence, will u be travelling to prove dem...let us reason like human beings and not animals please

I bin respect dis woman but it seems buhari,s sperm don harm her brain.... Woman sue your husband 1st for bin insensitive to the suffering of d poor masses... During JONA time ... We knw d rich are getting richer..d poor getting poorer.. but now the rich are getting poorer d poorer are dieing....

[size=18pt]Fayose must invite journalists to court so that Nigerians are well informed about the details in Aisha's Jefferson corruption scandal.

Buhari and some fulani goons in the security services should not even attempt to block journalists from this case.

Nigerians deserve to know what really happened.

I can't wait to read the details soon.Under the US Freedom of Information Act (https://www.foia.gov/) , Fayose should request a copy of FBI report on the bribery case.

Nigerians, Please go to the FBI website and under the "Contact us" tab, send them a letter requesting information on the Aisha Buhari involvement in the Louisiana Congressman William Jefferson bribery case.

Website here: https://www.fbi.gov/ [/size]

ganisucks:
I blame every Nigerian, for this distraction. We have a US fugitive occuping and desecrating the office of wife of the President, and we are taking it lightly.

What stupid and nonsense office of the first lady are you talking about? Did you elect the first lady or the president? Who gave her office? Is it in Nigeria's constitution? Didn't her useless dullard husband say he won't recognise the office of the first lady?

aresa:
[s][/s]



Ignorant and unintelligent Igbos bore me..

its obvious that your ignorance is bound to win gold medal in the Olympics.

banmee:


Bros, which kain law school you go. The burden of proof is on Fayose. Burden of proof is designed in such a way that an accuser is made to present proof first. This is why in court, the prosecution always presents it's case first. If it were not so, everybody would be accusing everyone of anything imaginable. Just like fayose is doing. He must have his proof or else why is he so sure. So, let him produce it. Gossip is not the same thing as evidence. In this case, Aisha is the accuser and all she needs to do is prove that Fayose slandered her. That is too easy. All the newspaper articles and interview he granted is enough evidence. If Fayose disagrees, he can then produce evidence confirming his utterances. Daring her to travel to the U.S is not proof that she is connected to any fraud. Well, that's not true. It is proof enough for the average dull Nigerian.

The burden of proof lies with the accuser. You basically expansiated on that. So keep speaking English. Aisha must first provide court admissible evidence which does not include hearsay and speculations and all fayose needs to do is create small doubt on those evidences for the suit to be thrown out which is easy with a good lawyer. Apart from video evidence, any other thing he said must have been reported by a news agency or third party

Prooving libel is not easy as you think

Suprnov3r:



The burden of proof lies with the accuser. You basically expansiated on that. So keep speaking English. Aisha must first provide court admissible evidence which does not include hearsay and speculations and all fayose needs to do is create small doubt on those evidences for the suit to be thrown out which is easy with a good lawyer. Apart from video evidence, any other thing he said must have been reported by a news agency or third party

Prooving libel is not easy as you think

Which kain tin be dis na? Seriously, where are you from. Your thought process is weirder than the average Nigerian. And that's freaking terrifying. So, lets assume you take me to court saying i stole something from you. Aren't you going to show evidence of what i stole? Where is the evidence implicating Aisha in anything? And in the case of Aisha suing him, what other evidence does she need than all the interviews he gave accusing and slandering her? Guy, google is not always your friend oooo.

aresa:




Which kain kabukabu layer be dis? When you make allegations againt other people, the burden is now on you to back up your allegations with documented facts and not the other way around..

What's wrong with you people?

Aristo3146:
Are you a psychiatric patience? No offence pls...
In case you are not a patience, let me point a little points to you...
1. Haliburton scandal is the same that involved a former US congress man Jefferson Williams...There is no haliburton scandal different from jefferson case as you claimed in your number four(4)
2. The Onus of prove lies with the accuser not the defence as claimed in your number (5)
3. Territorial Jurisdiction is irrelevant to this case...
Your next quote will prove to me if you are really typing this from Yaba psychiatric center...Thanks

banmee:


Bros, which kain law school you go. The burden of proof is on Fayose. Burden of proof is designed in such a way that an accuser is made to present proof first. This is why in court, the prosecution always presents it's case first. If it were not so, everybody would be accusing everyone of anything imaginable. Just like fayose is doing. He must have his proof or else why is he so sure. So, let him produce it. Gossip is not the same thing as evidence. In this case, Aisha is the accuser and all she needs to do is prove that Fayose slandered her. That is too easy. All the newspaper articles and interview he granted is enough evidence. If Fayose disagrees, he can then produce evidence confirming his utterances. Daring her to travel to the U.S is not proof that she is connected to any fraud. Well, that's not true. It is proof enough for the average dull Nigerian.

1. Fayose is the defendant, AISHA is the plaintiff and the burden of proof lies with Aisha, the plaintiff


2. As long as Fayose did not write any newspaper article himself, it is not admissible in a libel which leaves only a case of slander for Aisha against him

3. Fayose can always defend his statements in any video interview he gave with a good lawyer

4. If at any time any word spoken or document provided by Aisha as evidence is found as being wrong then Aisha can be prosecuted for lying under oath. That means during the case if a lawyer asks her explicitly if she has anything to do with the case or any other case as speculated by fayose and she denies, anyone either now or in the future can sue her including any government, so she has increased her exposure by doing this

5. Guys do read up stuffs before u quote me again

Suprnov3r:









1. Fayose is the defendant, AISHA is the plaintiff and the burden of proof lies with Aisha, the plaintiff


2. As long as Fayose did not write any newspaper article himself, it is not admissible in a libel which leaves only a case of slander for Aisha against him

3. Fayose can always defend his statements in any video interview he gave with a good lawyer

4. If at any time any word spoken or document provided by Aisha as evidence is found as being wrong then Aisha can be prosecuted for lying under oath. That means during the case if a lawyer asks her explicitly if she has anything to do with the case or any other case as speculated by fayose and she denies, anyone either now or in the future can sue her including any government, so she has increased her exposure by doing this

5. Guys do read up stuffs before u quote me again

Which kain pesin be dis? How can you defend what you cannot provide evidence off. I think you are confused as to what Aisha has to prove. This will be civil case where she has to prove that fayose has been making libelous statements about her. She does not have to prove anything about her involvement in any fraud. That is not how it works. All the newspaper articles and interviews fayose gave slandering her is all she needs. This is why it is a libel case. The only way fayose can beat this is to show a court judgement when Aisha was implicated in any fraud. And we all know that is not possible. I can't believe i have to explain this. Smh.

Suprnov3r:









1. Fayose is the defendant, AISHA is the plaintiff and the burden of proof lies with Aisha, the plaintiff


2. As long as Fayose did not write any newspaper article himself, it is not admissible in a libel which leaves only a case of slander for Aisha against him

3. Fayose can always defend his statements in any video interview he gave with a good lawyer

4. If at any time any word spoken or document provided by Aisha as evidence is found as being wrong then Aisha can be prosecuted for lying under oath. That means during the case if a lawyer asks her explicitly if she has anything to do with the case or any other case as speculated by fayose and she denies, anyone either now or in the future can sue her including any government, so she has increased her exposure by doing this

5. Guys do read up stuffs before u quote me again

So it's no longer who is right or wrong, it's now how he should defend what he accused someone of.
You guys are just something else

Otapipia:

Immunity from both civil and criminal actions. The court can put this case in abeyance until the garb of immunity is statutorily pulled off Fayose. The worst the court can do is to strike out the case for want of jurisdiction but will be revisited when fayose no longer enjoys immunity.

I missed this uninformed response.

Governors do not have absolute immunity from civil and criminal action. If so, how some Governors are removed from office as a result of court orders? You are overstretching the real intent of the framers of the Constitution when it comes to immunity if you continue to believe that this immunity is absolute.

Fayose and others are parties to Aisha's lawsuit and the defendants may eventually be required to pay damages worth millions of naira. The best Fayose can hope for under that circumstance is to pay after he leaves office.

nduchucks:


I missed this uninformed response.

Governors do not have absolute immunity from civil and criminal action. If so, how some Governors are removed from office as a result of court orders? You are overstretching the real intent of the framers of the Constitution when it comes to immunity if you continue to believe that this immunity is absolute.

Fayose and others are parties to Aisha's lawsuit and the defendants may eventually be required to pay damages worth millions of naira. The best Fayose can hope for under that circumstance is to pay after he leaves office.

This is the most uninformed reaction I have read too.

Please take note that court actions seeking to challenge the eligibility of a Governorship Candidate who won an election which is a pre election issue and/or actions challenging the election of a person as a Governor because of perceived irregularities are both exceptions, even though they are civil by nature. The two cases I mentioned earlier cannot be mentioned in the same breath as the case instituted against Fayose by Aisha. I repeat, that no civil case can be successfully instituted against a sitting Governor in his personal capacity with exception to the instances earlier highlighted. Just watch and see the outcome.