Lostz:
the law did not say you should cancel an election that is not in dispute. the election was not in trial, there was no court judgement stopping inec from going ahead with the election. APC did not say the election was faulty

The closest law to such a situation provides for fresh polls

Dansuqi:

Based on which law? What does section 140 states

Section 187
“(1) In any election to which the foregoing provisions of this part of this Chapter relate, a candidate for the office of Governor of a State shall not be deemed to have been validly nominated for such office unless he nominates another candidate as his associate for his running for the office of Governor, who is to occupy the office of Deputy Governor; and that candidate shall be deemed to have been duly elected to the office of Deputy Governor if the candidate who nominated him is duly elected as Governor in accordance with the said provisions.
(2) The provisions of this Part of this Chapter relating to qualification for election, tenure of office, disqualifications, declaration of assets and liabilities and Oath of Governor shall apply in relation to the office of Deputy Governor as if references to Governor were references to Deputy Governor.

donpapa:


Why single out Mary Odili? There were 5-members on that panel and they ALL gave a unanimous judgement.
The same Mary Odili didn’t fail woefully and exhibited her devilish attitude when she gave a favorable judgement for APC on Kaduna and Nassarawa gubernatorial cases? Why are you people like this?
It’s your personal decision if you have issue with the Bayelsa judgement, but stop the (blame game) hypocrisy!
This singular act won’t grow and strengthen our democracy.

the useless woman should be removed from supreme court and send back to state high court.
the same thing she did to rivers state in 2015.

Dansuqi:

Ill not dabble into that.let us follow the law rigidly

But he disqualified the candidate of the APC ?

Hahahahahahaha.....absolving the CJN and heaping abuses on Odili for same interpretation?

Na wah.....na real wah

Dansuqi:

The closest law to such a situation provides for fresh polls

which part of the law? copy it here

Lostz:
which part of the law? copy it here

Section 140 of the electoral act.search for it

fergie001:

But he disqualified the candidate of the APC ?

Hahahahahahaha.....absolving the CJN and heaping abuses on Odili for same interpretation?

Na wah.....na real wah

Let us limit ourselves to bayelsa please

Lostz:


Section 187
“(1) In any election to which the foregoing provisions of this part of this Chapter relate, a candidate for the office of Governor of a State shall not be deemed to have been validly nominated for such office unless he nominates another candidate as his associate for his running for the office of Governor, who is to occupy the office of Deputy Governor; and that candidate shall be deemed to have been duly elected to the office of Deputy Governor if the candidate who nominated him is duly elected as Governor in accordance with the said provisions.
(2) The provisions of this Part of this Chapter relating to qualification for election, tenure of office, disqualifications, declaration of assets and liabilities and Oath of Governor shall apply in relation to the office of Deputy Governor as if references to Governor were references to Deputy Governor.

Guy,where does it state that the 1st runner up benefits? You are funny oh.the punishmenr for this is clearly stated in the electoral act which boils down to what falana was saying

Dansuqi:

Section 140 of the electoral act.search for it

copy it here and point out how it back your claim like I always do

Johans1991:
the useless woman should be removed from supreme court and send back to state high court.
the same thing she did to rivers state in 2015.

I wont advice that.let her serve out her tenure

Dansuqi:

Based on which law? What does section 140 states

Section 140 has been nullified.....it's nonexistent.

Dansuqi:

Let us limit ourselves to bayelsa please

Hahahahahahaha....I understand.
On appeal at the Supreme Court, the apex court found, upholding the decision of the Tribunal, their argument being that where a provision of statute is capable of multiple valid interpretations, the Court is at liberty to pick and chose among which interpretation to adopt….

the precedent by the CJN was followed by Inyang Okoro last year and then Mary Odili this year.

Lostz:
copy it here and point out how it back your claim like I always do

Section 140of the PrincipalAct is amended-
Deletion of section
134 of the Prindpal
Act.
(a) in the marginal note, by substituting for the word "Notification"
"Nullification";
Amendment of
section 140 of the
the word Principal Act.
(b) by substituting for subsection (2) a new subsection"(2)"-
"(2) Where an election tribunal or court nullifies an election on the ground that the
person who obtained the highest votes at the election was not qualified to contest the
election, or that the election was marred by substantial irregularities or non-compliance
with the provisions of this Act, the election tribunal or court shall not declare the
person with the second highest votes or any other person as elected, but shall order
for a fresh election"; and
(c) by deleting subsection(4)
Section 144of the PrincipalAct is amended-
(a) by substituting for subsection (t), a new subs

fergie001:

Hahahahahahaha....I understand.
On appeal at the Supreme Court, the apex court found, upholding the decision of the Tribunal, their argument being that where a provision of statute is capable of multiple valid interpretations, the Court is at liberty to pick and chose among which interpretation to adopt….

the precedent by the CJN was followed by Inyang Okoro last year and then Mary Odili this year.

The only law existing is 140.there is no multiple or varied interpretations.therefore the above case does not apply here.i rule you out of order

fergie001:

I know where his pendulum always swing.
This Bayelsa case made him a bit transigent though.

I remember him opening a thread why Diri won't be sworn in a day before, but that is his opinion...we must not agree on everything.

Will tag him next time, but kahal hasn't said a word on Bayelsa surprisingly.

I opened a thread on why Diri might not be sworn in since he did win across the geographical zones.However INEC interpreted the judgment to mean all APC votes were voided.INEC is entitled to his interpretation. This however is one of the issues in the appeal filed by the APC.

Dansuqi:

Guy,where does it state that the 1st runner up benefits? You are funny oh.the punishmenr for this is clearly stated in the electoral act which boils down to what falana was saying

“(1) In any election to which the foregoing provisions of this part of this Chapter relate, a candidate for the office of Governor of a State shall not be deemed to have been validly nominated for such office unless he nominates another candidate as his associate for his running for the office of Governor.


the first runner up did not benefit. Diri is the winner.
there was no legally valid APC candidate in this election.
you saw the result released by Inec after the election? the APC candidate and his vote were struck out; 0 vote like any other party that did not participate

Dansuqi:

Section 140of the PrincipalAct is amended-
Deletion of section
134 of the Prindpal
Act.
(a) in the marginal note, by substituting for the word "Notification"
"Nullification";
Amendment of
section 140 of the
the word Principal Act.
(b) by substituting for subsection (2) a new subsection"(2)"-
"(2) Where an election tribunal or court nullifies an election on the ground that the
person who obtained the highest votes at the election was not qualified to contest the
election, or that the election was marred by substantial irregularities or non-compliance
with the provisions of this Act, the election tribunal or court shall not declare the
person with the second highest votes or any other person as elected, but shall order
for a fresh election"; and
(c) by deleting subsection(4)
Section 144of the PrincipalAct is amended-
(a) by substituting for subsection (t), a new subs

I love the knowledge of this.


Justice G.O.K. Oyewole, then a High Court judge ruled against this Electoral act, that it is at variance with the Constitution, hence the Constitution MUST always supersede any act.


According to the judge, “Sections 140 (2) and 141 of the Electoral Act 2010 delimits power of the court to adjudicate dispute between parties in Election Petition. It, therefore, derogates powers enshrined in Sections 4 [8] and 6 (1) of the Constitution.

“The decision a court can arrive at in any dispute is based on the peculiar facts and evidences presented before it, it is not what any parliament can technically determine. Once a tribunal is seized with a matter in line with provisions of section 239 and 385 of the constitution, it can no longer reside with the legislature to curtail or abridge the powers of that court.

“I, therefore, find Sections 140 (2) and 141 needless and an unnecessary intrusion, it is my view that election tribunals can operate effectively without these two provisions.

“Consequently, it is hereby declared inconsistent with the provisions of the 1999 constitution and, therefore, null and void. The various election tribunals shall not be bound by the provisions of Sections 140 (2) and 141, it is thus accordingly struck-down, same being unconstitutional.”

The matter was taken to the SC and Justice Oyewole's submissions to were upheld .

Dansuqi:

Onnoghen nko? Buhari will be waiting

I am sure you don't understand what juridical immunity is.

fergie001:

Section 140 has been nullified.....it's nonexistent.

I disagree sir.it was nullified purportedly by a rogue high court judge.the appeal court rulings has brought it back to life if actually nullified.a law can only be null and void if it clashes with a constititional provision and in this case,this is not the case.it is alive...

Dansuqi:

I disagree sir.it was nullified purportedly by a rogue high court judge.the appeal court rulings has brought it back to life if actually nullified.a law can only be null and void if it clashes with a constititional provision and in this case,this is not the case.it is alive...

See you....the SC authenticated it.

Lostz:


“(1) In any election to which the foregoing provisions of this part of this Chapter relate, a candidate for the office of Governor of a State shall not be deemed to have been validly nominated for such office unless he nominates another candidate as his associate for his running for the office of Governor.


the first runner up did not benefit. Diri is the winner.
there was no legally valid APC candidate in this election.
you saw the result released by Inec after the election? the APC candidate and his vote were struck out; 0 vote like any other party that did not participate

Sorry this is nonsense

fergie001:

See you....the SC authenticated it.

When sir

Dansuqi:

I dont need to tell you that they will surely reverse themselves by march

It is easier to reverse IMO than Bayelsa. SCN will not reverse themselves on Bayelsa.

It is too dangerous for our judiciary

ChristianNorth:

I am sure you don't understand what juridical immunity is.

Why should i

ChristianNorth:

It is easier to reverse IMO than Bayelsa. SCN will not reverse themselves on Bayelsa.

It is too dangerous for our judiciary

It is easier to reverse bayelsa actually.infact the reversal of imo will automatically lead to that of bayslsa

Dansuqi:

Section 140of the PrincipalAct is amended-
Deletion of section
134 of the Prindpal
Act.
(a) in the marginal note, by substituting for the word "Notification"
"Nullification";
Amendment of
section 140 of the
the word Principal Act.
(b) by substituting for subsection (2) a new subsection"(2)"-
"(2)[/b] Where an election tribunal or court nullifies an election[b] on the ground that the
person who obtained the highest votes at the election was not qualified to contest the
election, or that the election was marred by substantial irregularities or non-compliance
with the provisions of this Act, the election tribunal or court shall not declare the
person with the second highest votes or any other person as elected, but shall order
for a fresh election"; and
(c) by deleting subsection(4)
Section 144of the PrincipalAct is amended-
(a) by substituting for subsection (t), a new subs

Note; nullify an election not disqualify a candidate

Dansuqi:

I disagree sir.it was nullified purportedly by a rogue high court judge.the appeal court rulings has brought it back to life if actually nullified.a law can only be null and void if it clashes with a constititional provision and in this case,this is not the case.it is alive...

Please post the AC ruling here.

Dansuqi:

It is easier to reverse bayelsa actually.infact the reversal of imo will automatically lead to that of bayslsa

Hahahahahahaha

Dansuqi:

I disagree sir.it was nullified purportedly by a rogue high court judge.the appeal court rulings has brought it back to life if actually nullified.a law can only be null and void if it clashes with a constititional provision and in this case,this is not the case.it is alive...

How is Justice Oyewole a rogue high court judge?

A JCA of the Enugu FCoA....please don't talk to our learned Jurists in that manner.

fergie001:

I love the knowledge of this.


Justice G.O.K. Oyewole, then a High Court judge ruled against this Electoral act, that it is at variance with the Constitution, hence the Constitution MUST always supersede any act.


According to the judge, “Sections 140 (2) and 141 of the Electoral Act 2010 delimits power of the court to adjudicate dispute between parties in Election Petition. It, therefore, derogates powers enshrined in Sections 4 [8] and 6 (1) of the Constitution.

“The decision a court can arrive at in any dispute is based on the peculiar facts and evidences presented before it, it is not what any parliament can technically determine. Once a tribunal is seized with a matter in line with provisions of section 239 and 385 of the constitution, it can no longer reside with the legislature to curtail or abridge the powers of that court.

“I, therefore, find Sections 140 (2) and 141 needless and an unnecessary intrusion, it is my view that election tribunals can operate effectively without these two provisions.

“Consequently, it is hereby declared inconsistent with the provisions of the 1999 constitution and, therefore, null and void. The various election tribunals shall not be bound by the provisions of Sections 140 (2) and 141, it is thus accordingly struck-down, same being unconstitutional.”

The matter was taken to the SC and Justice Oyewole's submissions to were upheld .

This is a big lie.actually it was never taken up or appealed.during the osun guber case,the inec lawyer stated that a full panel of the supreme court upheld that section and i saw no dissent.cast your mind back

Dansuqi:

Sorry this is nonsense

it is nonsense to you but that is the law

fergie001:

How is Justice Oyewole a rogue high court judge?

A JCA of the Enugu FCoA....please don't talk to our learned Jurists in that manner.

Oga,it was Gabriel kolawole not Joseph oyewole