Zona123:

Why is ur so called party of integrity afraid if they have nothing to hide? If actually PDP had hacked into the server of INEC to get the information the tendered at the tribunal, then why can't you believe that the figures they have is the real outcome of the election since they stole it from the INEC's server? If you think the figures they have isn't the correct figures why worry about how or where they got it from?

Hacking inec server is a crime punishable by law.

senatordave1:

You cannot tender a document obtained frequently in court,it is not done.you cannot fight illegality with illegality.all parties can only be in possession of inec materials duly issued by inec otherwise its a crime

PDP is asking for the server results to be tendered as a counter to what they have.

senatordave1:

Well that doesn't matter.what matters is how pdp got access into inec server

Bros, the issue is.....is the result in the server true? if not true, let inec generate the true server result to the public.....
Bros to know Nigerian election result from inec is not a crime, why is inec hiding access to server when they can simply direct the protocol that is accessible easily to the public.......
whether PDP hack it or not, what APC is arguing is unsubstantial , l thought they should be arguing that the result is not true but here they are talking of hacking but kept mute on the figures...

In law what governs the tendering of a document is admissibility and relevancy. Relevancy is the bedrock of admissibility! Before tendering a document in a court of law, you are bound to ask yourself two questions, which aresad1)Is the document sought to be tendered admissible in evidence? (2) Is the document sought to be tendered relevant to the facts in issue? This can be seen in the dry letters of section 4 and 5 of the Evidence Act. An illegally or improperly obtained is admissible in evidence as long as it is relevant to the facts in issue. it is settled law that, the test to be applied in considering whether evidence is admissible in a civil or criminal case is whether it is relevant to the matter in issue. See Oshunride v. Akande (1996) 6 NWLR (Pt. 455) 383, (1996) 6 SCNJ 193 at 199 - 200 - per Mohammed, JSC, Dr. Ufere Torti v. Chief Chris Ukpabi & Ors. (1984) 1 S.C. 370 at 412 - 143, (1984) ANLR 185 at 195; (1984) ANLR 185 at 195; (1984) 1 SCNLR 214.

senatordave1:

That will be determined at the end of proceedings.for now,how did it get into inec server? Was it given to them officially by inec or through a court order? If not,pdp has committed a crime which should damage their case.every item belonging to inec in the possession of all parties must have been given out to them through the right channel.

internet is free the last time I checked..... Inec that is suppose to be neutral aided apc.... That is the highest crime... A biased inec is not suppose to be electoral umpire...
.nigeria is indeed a zoo

cyberguy72:
Tell me what you wud do .......Remember Venezuela!

Don’t worry. You’ll see

rummmy:
internet is free the last time I checked..... Inec that is suppose to be neutral aided apc.... That is the highest crime... A biased inec is not suppose to be electoral umpire...
.nigeria is indeed a zoo

Please,keep your sentiments aside.let the court decide that.for now,how did pdp get into inec server

Ugwoji101:
In law what governs the tendering of a document is admissibility and relevancy. Relevancy is the bedrock of admissibility! Before tendering a document in a court of law, you are bound to ask yourself two questions, which aresad1)Is the document sought to be tendered admissible in evidence? (2) Is the document sought to be tendered relevant to the facts in issue? This can be seen in the dry letters of section 4 and 5 of the Evidence Act. An illegally or improperly obtained is admissible in evidence as long as it is relevant to the facts in issue. it is settled law that, the test to be applied in considering whether evidence is admissible in a civil or criminal case is whether it is relevant to the matter in issue. See Oshunride v. Akande (1996) 6 NWLR (Pt. 455) 383, (1996) 6 SCNJ 193 at 199 - 200 - per Mohammed, JSC, Dr. Ufere Torti v. Chief Chris Ukpabi & Ors. (1984) 1 S.C. 370 at 412 - 143, (1984) ANLR 185 at 195; (1984) ANLR 185 at 195; (1984) 1 SCNLR 214.

Thats a big lie.you are even citing precedents outside the 1999 constitution.lets leave the law aside first which you are obviously poor in.even before pdp inspected inec materials,they had to get a court order.before a policeman searches your hoyse,they need a warrant.only a law enforcement agency can access the servers if government or individuals legally.pdp has committed a crime,just accept it

UncletC:
Bros, the issue is.....is the result in the server true? if not true, let inec generate the true server result to the public.....
Bros to know Nigerian election result from inec is not a crime, why is inec hiding access to server when they can simply direct the protocol that is accessible easily to the public.......
whether PDP hack it or not, what APC is arguing is unsubstantial , l thought they should be arguing that the result is not true but here they are talking of hacking but kept mute on the figures...

Oga,that election matter is in court.they will argue it there.how did pdp get the document

soulpeppersoup:


So those who work at inec are not humans?

You haven't answered the question

senatordave1:

Please,keep your sentiments aside.let the court decide that.for now,how did pdp get into inec server

[

senatordave1:

Please,keep your sentiments aside.let the court decide that.for now,how did pdp get into inec server

quote author=senatordave1 post=76999470]
Thats a big lie.you are even citing precedents outside the 1999 constitution.lets leave the law aside first which you are obviously poor in.even before pdp inspected inec materials,they had to get a court order.before a policeman searches your hoyse,they need a warrant.only a law enforcement agency can access the servers if government or individuals legally.pdp has committed a crime,just accept it[/quote] I do not need to argue with a layman like you. It's obvious you don't know what you are saying. Admissibility of document is governed by Evidence Act and not constitution.if you don't know what to write you keep quiet and stop disgracing yourself.

Ugwoji101:
[quote author=senatordave1 post=76999470]
Thats a big lie.you are even citing precedents outside the 1999 constitution.lets leave the law aside first which you are obviously poor in.even before pdp inspected inec materials,they had to get a court order.before a policeman searches your hoyse,they need a warrant.only a law enforcement agency can access the servers if government or individuals legally.pdp has committed a crime,just accept it I do not need to argue with a layman like you. It's obvious you don't know what you are saying. Admissibility of document is governed by Evidence Act and not constitution.if you don't know what to write you keep quiet and stop disgracing yourself.

Look how fast and dumb you are just like your moniker.so that act is superior to the constitution ?

The way APC is running upandan over this server thing is really curious.

baganas:

Hacking inec server is a crime punishable by law.

But is the information obtain a valid evidence? If yes then apc in trouble. The manner of obtaining evidence doesn't vitiate the evidence.

senatordave1:

Please,keep your sentiments aside.let the court decide that.for now,how did pdp get into inec server

continue chasing shadows while the real issue burns

It's obvious you don't know what you are talking about.why I'm i even arguing with an ignoramus? He that knows not and refuse to learn is what?

IamaNigerianGuy:


You APC people really say the most idiotic things. Between hacking a server and forging election results which is the greater crime ?

Don't mind the buffoon.

ozo13:
till we get to that level.all I know is tribunal order jus granting both parties only access to materials excluding the server.how will pdp now use server data as evidence at the same tribunal that's even if it's true o.

Apc is a step ahead of pdp now by saying pdp hacked into the system and change the data.apc can as well do their own to favour them .

More so, all this server stuff I don't think can be use in court of law as the constitution currently I don't think allow electronic stuffs in an election.open to correction sha if am wrong.

you are trying to say that in schools (uni) they don't input people's result data in computer for reference purpose? Saying that the ones they write on papers are the only ones they have?