garfield1:


You are misapprehending the situation here.pdp claims that the cause of action here is from election day.pdp have formulated a cause of action.that is what the court will work with.If the court disagrees,the case is over.

Let us leave it to them for now.

fergie001:

Read that case very well...its different from the Bayelsa own.
In Kogi's case, Akpoti submitted the name of an under-aged Deputy 3 days to the deadline for submission.

3 days to the deadline for substitution....she submitted another.

INEC said No way....the first didn't meet up, so we won't accept the substitution even if the second met the Criteria.

She went to Court and Justice Giwa said...as long as she beats the deadline for substitution....she is fine.

Even if she submitted a 5 year old and changed it before substitution...there is no P with that.

In this Bayelsa case, they sent the name of an under-aged Deputy and only substituted when time had elapsed.

PS: APP did the same thing in Kogi and Bayelsa, the FHC Abuja upheld INEC's decision on excluding them.

Guy,you have corroborated me.this is what I have been telling you,you have sold yourself short.in kogi,sdp submitted an underage candidate and tried to substitute after the deadline but inec declined but the courts agreed.same thing applies to bsyelsa.andp submitted an underage candidate within time and tried to substitute after the deadline has passed.in the eyes of the law,the first submission is legal and recognized.the court in kogi never had any issue with the age of the candidate.
That underage candidate andp originally submitted is valid and the substitution they tried to do is invalid since it was outside the time.therefore,the candidature of andp was valid.inec had no powers to disq him.this is what I've been telling you

icedbreez:


Can u avail me of the section and subsection of the Constitution that says Party exclusion litigation starts after declaration of result.
And also avail us of the recent supreme Court judgement that said 21 days started counting after issuance of CoR. (Who vs Who)? lol
Thank you.

Section 138 d of the electoral act gives tribunal powers to handle matters of exclusion

garfield1:



[s]Guy,you have corroborated me.this is what I have been telling you,you have sold yourself short. [/s] in kogi,sdp submitted an underage candidate and tried to substitute after the deadline but inec declined but the courts agreed.same thing applies to bsyelsa.

Please read properly....
They substituted 3 days before the deadline....not AFTER
Please read again....

ejimatic:
Lawyers will have reasons for their appeals .It is the duty of the judged to appraise the appeals and decide accordingly. The majority judgement in the case under review disagrees with the disqualification of ANDP candidate for the seat of DG on the following. grounds: 1. INEC has no legal right to disqualify any candidate or party.The duty of INEC is to supervise an election not to disqualify. Only Courts can do so.There are various judgments on this even in the SC.All those that have been removed from offices went through court processes. It is of interest to note that no law in our constitution and electoral act empowers INEC to disqualify a candidate.A party had a primary ,produced a candidate only to be rejected by INEC .It is unconstituional.I agree with the lead judgement that a fresh election should be conducted in Bayelsa. 2 On the issue of 14 days ,the majority judgement is of the opinion that it should start 14 February when Diri was declared winner since it is presumed by law that with the declaration of Diri election has been concluded. Then any appeal against it can come in....I agree with this conclusion.That is why ANDP went to tribunal after the declaration. Diri's Appeal: It is good for Diri to appeal since he was a respondent in the case.However I did not see in his appeal where issue of legality of INEC to disqualify ANDP candidate is mentioned. All is about status barred of 14 days. Justice Sirajo' s judgement : The judge in .his judgement agreed with the decision of the INEC to disqualify ANDP candidate.He did not talk about whether INEC has the right to do so or not.This is a grey area in his judgement. Additionally he did not talk about when the 14 days should start in the judgement. He only discussed INEC regulation which only a court of law can interpret and decide on. Appeal Matters arising: The appeal court will decide the follows: 1. Did the INEC have the poweer to disqualify candidates in view of previous judgement against that? 2 When did the 14 days of ANDP should start in view of the declaration of Diri on 14 February 2020? Conclusion: ANDP has a strong case at the tribunal appeal and SC[

That means you did not.read diri full appeal.

Please do take time to get diri full appeal

fergie001:

Please read properly....
They substituted 3 days before the deadline....not AFTER
Please read again....

It is almost the same thing na.the judge in kogi said that whatever she submitted within timeline must be accepted by inec whether they are qualified or not.
The andp had submitted an underage candidate which inec rejected but the law accepts.they tried to substitute him outside the deadline which is illegal.in the eyes of the law,there was no substitution.the first name submitted still stands in the eyes of the law whether underage or not

fergie001:

Let us leave it to them for now.

That's what you say but when you see a new post
about bsyelsa,you will still start another round of argument

garfield1:


It is almost the same thing na.the judge in kogi said that whatever she submitted within timeline must be accepted by inec whether they are qualified or not.

Do you know how this sounds?

garfield1:


That's what you say but when you see a new post
about bsyelsa,you will still start another round of argument

ejimatic brought me here this morning....not Bayelsa, na you still carry come.

fergie001:

Do you know how this sounds?

What is your problem? Why are you desperately trying to help a helpless diri? Does inec have the power to disqualify an underage candidate or not?

garfield1:


What is your problem? Why are you desperately trying to help a helpless diri? Does inec have the power to disqualify an underage candidate or not?

I am not a lawyer neither are you, we can't help them.

My problem is that you are going on and on.....Again, leave this issue for the Appeal Court & then SC...ahn ahn

Hian

Ejimatic,please help us answer this question.since andp submitted a new candidate when the substitution window had elapsed,does this negate their first submission which was filed within time? Kahal

fergie001:

I am not a lawyer neither are you, we can't help them.

My problem is that you are going on and on.....Again, leave this issue for the Appeal Court & then SC...ahn ahn

Hian

We are not leaving anything.you are trying to confuse yourself.any substitution done outside time cannot negate the original name submitted.ezekwesili withdrew from the election days to election but inec told her that her candidature is still valid.this is a simple matter

garfield1:


We are not leaving anything.you are trying to confuse yourself.any substitution done outside time cannot negate the original name submitted.ezekwesili withdrew from the election days to election but inec told her that her candidature is still valid.this is a simple matter

K

Aaa594

Justice Sirajo sef on ISSUE 1

fergie001:
Aaa594

Justice Sirajo sef on ISSUE 1

Sorry,section 138 d has made this a tribunal matter.infact,pdp claiming election day as the cause of action has killed his prayer that is why I said there are two matters for determination

fergie001:

K

I think we are now in agreement that prayer one belonging to inec which raises the question of inec's powers to disqualify an underage candidate submitted within time will be resolved in favour of andp

In the first place the issue is a preelection matter which are handle by a federal high court,not a tribunal,it is a party that participate in an election that can challenge the outcome of an election because a tribunal is set up after the winner has emerge,so the andp not being the participants of the election did not have any right to approach the tribunal abinitio my humble submission

garfield1:

k

Dmano:
In the first place the issue is a preelection matter which are handle by a federal high court,not a tribunal,it is a party that participate in an election that can challenge the outcome of an election because a tribunal is set up after the winner has emerge,so the andp not being the participants of the election did not have any right to approach the tribunal abinitio my humble submission

Abeg
God bless you, my bro....

garfield1:


What is your problem? Why are you desperately trying to help a helpless diri? Does inec have the power to disqualify an underage candidate or not?

The electoral law and the constitution do not recognise underage. If andp had won election with that, wouldn't APC or PDP have gone to court to challenge it? Would andp still have won with that illegality? Are we now saying wether according to the law or not all candidates must be allowed allowed to be voted for? Would there then be a case against underage voting?

seunayantokun:


The electoral law and the constitution do not recognise underage. If andp had won election with that, wouldn't APC or PDP have gone to court to challenge it? Would andp still have won with that illegality? Are we now saying wether according to the law or not all candidates must be allowed allowed to be voted for? Would there then be a case against underage voting?

The bolded is crucial.our laws do not actually support underage candidacy but it is not in the place of inec to disqualify such a defaulter.they have no powers to do so.only the courts can.in the eyes of the law,every contestant is qualified until proven otherwise before a law court not inec.

garfield1:



The bolded is crucial.our laws do not actually support underage candidacy but it is not in the place of inec to disqualify such a defaulter.they have no powers to do so.only the courts can.in the eyes of the law,every contestant is qualified until proven otherwise before a law court not inec.

It's very funny then! So, the referee can't call a free kick, penalty, etc again on the pitch until they take the matter to the court of arbitration for sports. I'm amused.

fergie001:

Abeg
God bless you, my bro....

Good.the word disqualification is key.both inec and pdp said the andp candidate was not disqualified but excluded.the constitution talks about disqualification while the electoral act talks about exclusion which all parties here have joined issues.therefore,it is a post election matter.so sweet

seunayantokun:


It's very funny then! So, the referee can't call a free kick, penalty, etc again on the pitch until they take the matter to the court of arbitration for sports. I'm amused.

Yes,our laws are funny and full of inadequacies.there is no law that clothes inec powers to disqualify or exclude any candidate if the electoral act or constitutional provision is breached.that is the duty of the judiciary.

But if the guidelines of inec are breached,it can then act.examples of these are late submission...

garfield1:

k

fergie001:

k

Why are you running away?

garfield1:


Yes,our laws are funny and full of inadequacies.there is no law that clothes inec powers to disqualify or exclude any candidate if the electoral act or constitutional provision is breached.that is the duty of the judiciary.

But if the guidelines of inec are breached,it can then act.examples of these are late submission...

If it acts that must be wrong too. As it is, no one is expected to go by INEC guidelines. The beginning of multiple court cases that draw back, and the end of it chaos & confusion.

seunayantokun:


If it acts that must be wrong too. As it is, no one is expected to go by INEC guidelines. The beginning of multiple court cases that draw back, and the end of it chaos & confusion.

No.anytime a party breaches inec guidelines and submits names of candidates outside inec timeline or does its primaries late and inec acts,the court sides them.but when inec disqualify a party because of a constitutional infringement,the court rules against inec.I have canvassed that nass should give inec powers to disqualify

garfield1:


No.anytime a party breaches inec guidelines and submits names of candidates outside inec timeline or does its primaries late and inec acts,the court sides them.but when inec disqualify a party because of a constitutional infringement,the court rules against inec.I have canvassed that nass should give inec powers to disqualify

All eyes on the appellate courts then.