BluntCrazeMan:
Do we have to go through this again?
So, who made TANKO And the Six Other Judges the Collation Officers??
If INEC made a mistake, does it now mean that the job of INEC now belongs to the Supreme Court Judges??
Even if the mistakes were properly and adequately established at the court by the petitioner, but then the new supposed values were NOT also established and proven to be very correct in the court right in front of everyone, and such newly established values accepted by INEC, Is it now the work of the Supreme Court Judges to go back to their Chambers and start the Re-collation process by themselves, even without the notice of the INEC?? And the Judges even went ahead to announce their Supreme Court Results which INEC was not even aware of. Is that supposed to be the right judgement?
..
Is the best judgement not supposed to be “A Recount of the Votes” or “A Re-collation”??

You people are just only interested in IMO state because it went against your PDP. But in your eyes, Zamfara and Bayelsa is very fantastic. Double standard.

contigiency:


You people are just only interested in IMO state because it went against your PDP. But in your eyes, Zamfara and Bayelsa is very fantastic. Double standard.

If you think the Imo State Judgement was okay, then fine. I will not quote you again.
But for the Zamfara and Bayelsa Judgements, and whatever other judgements that were below the standard expectations, all those Judges need to be severely and thoroughly sanctioned.
..
What I am saying is this..
He cannot be sanctioning some few judges (just because some reasonable pay had entered his hands) and then leave the whole judicial system still messy and smelling.
..
If he wants me to applaud him, let him go back to the time he became CJN, review all Supreme Court Judgements, and sanction every single foul Judgement.
..
One thing with the Judicial system is that, it has no checks and balances. There are No good measures that are out in place to check the fairness and the uprightness in the Judgements. The Judgements are only at the mercy of the judges whom were assumed as perfect and incorruptible. But we all know that they are highly corrupt.
..
He can even do better by going back and starting from 2015, or any earlier year he so wishes.

BluntCrazeMan:
You're wrong..
You're very very wrong about your conclusion on my take on this..
..
I hate double-standards..
..
My stance is that the Judgement of Imo State Governorship is so bad and tasteless. And as far as that judgement is established as very wrong and fraudulent, then all those Judges that supported him in that judgement should face a thorough sanction.
..
But No.
Everybody overlooked it, and everybody remained silent.
And that made him to think that the Judgement was actually just and upright??
Imagine that a case for review was filed, and he himself sat at the head of the panel again, instead of another judge.
..
And now, he is sanitising the system and forgot that the sanitising should start from him and those Judges that sat with him on that case??
..
Or are you saying that there was absolutely nothing wrong in that Imo State Judgement?
Then you let me know, so that I will stop quoting you henceforth..
(Don't come with the “Supreme Court had ruled it” jargon.. The Judiciary is corrupt as already established by the same Tanko; and it can also be a statement of fact that he himself had been a beneficiary of the corrupt judicial system, of which the Imo State Judgement stands out overwhelmingly)
..
Nevertheless, if you think that there is something wrong with that Imo State Judgement, then why is he sanitising and sanctioning others, and leaving himself and those other six Judges to remain standing as saints?
..
I hate double-standards..
This your Tanko, he should start the sanitisation from himself first...
SIMPLE AND SHORT.

INEC took action that is antithetical to the electoral act.

If you had taken time to read all sides to the story, you would have understood this.

If you do a background check on me here on Nairaland, you would find out I’m a PDP apologist and has never supported Buhari nor APC.

So, like you, I was very vexed when Supreme Court made that pronouncement. But rather than remain emotional about the whole thing, I wore my thinking cap and I started trying to find out why Supreme Court did what it did.

What did I find out? I found out that the Electoral Act states that cancellation of election votes(if found to be fraudulent) must be done at the polling unit by the Returning Officer at the polling unit.

Now what happened in Imo? INEC Local Govt returning officer cancelled the votes from over 155 polling units totaling about 330,000 after Polling Unit Returning Officers had certified these votes as valid and party agents duly signed to certify they were the reflection of the numbers truly gotten from these Polling Units(even if the whole thing was flawed).

You see what I mean when I say INEC gave Imo governorship to Uzodimma?

Because what justification does a Local Government Returning Officer have to cancel election results that has already been certified as authentic by on-field officers? Can he claim to have evidence of electoral fraud more than those who organized those elections?

Penguin2:


INEC took action that is antithetical to the electoral act.

If you had taken time to read all sides to the story, you would have understood this.

If you do a background check on me here on Nairaland, you would find out I’m a PDP apologist and has never supported Buhari nor APC.

So, like you, I was very vexed when Supreme Court made that pronouncement. But rather than remain emotional about the whole thing, I wore my thinking cap and I started trying to find out why Supreme Court did what it did.

What did I find out? I found out that the Electoral Act states that cancellation of election votes(if found to be fraudulent) must be done at the polling unit by the Returning Officer at the polling unit.

Now what happened in Imo? INEC Local Govt returning officer cancelled the votes from over 155 polling units totaling about 330,000 after Polling Unit Returning Officers had certified these votes as valid and party agents duly signed to certify they were the reflection of the numbers truly gotten from these Polling Units(even if the whole thing was flawed).

You see what I mean when I say INEC gave Imo governorship to Uzodimma?

Because what justification does a Local Government Returning Officer have to cancel election results that has already been certified as authentic by on-field officers? Can he claim to have evidence of electoral fraud more than those who organized those elections?

That is still not my argument.
..
My argument is...
“Going by the Nigerian Constitution, and by the same Electoral Act which you mentioned, is it the duty of the Supreme Court Judges to do the Addition and Subtraction of the votes without the consent of INEC??”
(Even though INEC erred, it is still the constitutional duty of INEC to correct the mistakes they made, and not the supreme court judges.)
..
So, I am saying that they committed the foul in their judgement by doing the job which is the constitutional rights, and duties, and obligations of INEC.
..
You can continue to misunderstand me though.
But what I am saying is the truth.

BluntCrazeMan:
That is still not my argument.
..
My argument is...
“Going by the Nigerian Constitution, and by the same Electoral Act which you mentioned, is it the duty of the Supreme Court Judges to do the Addition and Subtraction of the votes without the consent of INEC??”
(Even though INEC erred, it is still the constitutional duty of INEC to correct the mistakes they made, and not the supreme court judges.)
..
So, I am saying that they committed the foul in their judgement by doing the job which is the constitutional rights, and duties, and obligations of INEC.
..
You can continue to misunderstand me though.
But what I am saying is the truth.

If it was established that Hope’s votes were unjustly canceled, isn’t it Supreme Court’s duty to correct injustice rather than subject such a person to another round of torturous process for an election he has duly won but his victory was erroneously impeded?

Penguin2:


If it was established that Hope’s votes were unjustly canceled, isn’t it Supreme Court’s duty to correct injustice rather than subject such a person to another round of torturous process for an election he has duly won but his victory was erroneously impeded?

It is not, Okay...!!
It is not.
Counting of Votes, or Collation of Votes is not Supreme Court’s Duty., And it can never be
..
Research further on this.

BluntCrazeMan:
It is not, Okay...!!
It is not.
Counting of Votes, or Collation of Votes is not Supreme Court’s Duty., And it can never be
..
Research further on this.

Why are you limiting the scope and powers of election Tribunal?

Because an election tribunal has powers to void elections, declare rerun or announce an entirely new winner.

Now if an election tribunal has these powers, why shouldn’t Supreme Court have it since it is the final place where the actions of the Election Tribunal will be tested.

Penguin2:


Why are you limiting the scope and powers of election Tribunal?

Because an election tribunal has powers to void elections, declare rerun or announce an entirely new winner.

Now if an election tribunal has these powers, why shouldn’t Supreme Court have it since it is the final place where the actions of the Election Tribunal will be tested.

In announcing a new winner, shouldn't the new figures be established in the court?
The only thing that was established was the error of INEC, which should void the Election, or cause a rerun.
..
The new vote-counts were not determined in the court.
The judges after establishing that INEC erred, now went ahead do the tallying..
And what's more?? The tallying they did was wrongly done.

Penguin2:


Why are you limiting the scope and powers of election Tribunal?

Because an election tribunal has powers to void elections, declare rerun or announce an entirely new winner.

Now if an election tribunal has these powers, why shouldn’t Supreme Court have it since it is the final place where the actions of the Election Tribunal will be tested.

The scope and the powers of the Election Tribunal is not limitless either.
It has limits.
The tribunal shouldn't assume powers that they don't have.
Also, they shouldn't assume premises that are not yet proven to be true.
..
Nothing is wrong with declaring an entirely new winner, but the figures that made the new winner to emerge must be well established and ironed out in the proceedings.

BluntCrazeMan:
In announcing a new winner, shouldn't the new figures be established in the court?
The only thing that was established was the error of INEC, which should void the Election, or cause a rerun.
..
The new vote-counts were not determined in the court.
The judges after establishing that INEC erred, now went ahead do the tallying..
And what's more?? The tallying they did was wrongly done.

There were lawyers in court with these numbers and the evidence to back it up that they represent the right figure that was denied Hope Uzodimma through INEC’s flawed action.

Since the court only works with evidence(s) before it, would you blame the learned Justices for working with the evidence(even if flawed but unproven to be so by defense counsels) before it to now add the contested numbers to the existing votes which skyrocketed Uzodimma from 3rd to 1st.

What happened at the Supreme Court in Imo case might be emotionally torturous but it is logically and legally sound.

BluntCrazeMan:
The scope and the powers of the Election Tribunal is not limitless either.
It has limits.
The tribunal shouldn't assume powers that they don't have.
Also, they shouldn't assume premises that are not yet proven to be true.
..
Nothing is wrong with declaring an entirely new winner, but the figures that made the new winner to emerge must be well established and ironed out in the proceedings.

Admitted that the powers of the the Election Tribunal is not limitless; but it surely includes declaring a new winner which has happened many times before in our judicial system.

Uzodimma’s votes in more may have been fraudulently gotten but his handlers and strategists were intelligent.

Penguin2:


Admitted that the powers of the the Election Tribunal is not limitless; but it surely includes declaring a new winner which has happened many times before in our judicial system.

Uzodimma’s votes in more may have been fraudulently gotten but his handlers and strategists were intelligent.

As for this one, I agree.
I no doubt am

Penguin2:


There were lawyers in court with these numbers and the evidence to back it up that they represent the right figure that was denied Hope Uzodimma through INEC’s flawed action.

Since the court only works with evidence(s) before it, would you blame the learned Justices for working with the evidence(even if flawed but unproven to be so by defense counsels) before it to now add the contested numbers to the existing votes which skyrocketed Uzodimma from 3rd to 1st.

What happened at the Supreme Court in Imo case might be emotionally torturous but it is logically and legally sound.

The tribunal and the appeal court didn't cross-examine the documents which Uzodimma presented, neither did they dwell much on determining the authenticity of the figures contained within.
..
The Supreme Court took the figures like that after establishing that INEC erred.
A document whose figures are not confirmed in the lower courts, and yet the Supreme Court didn't make efforts to determine the correctness of the figures??
Who does that?
..
That INEC made a mistake is one thing.
That Uzodimma presented some documents (through the Police) which contained some data about the election is another thing altogether.
Then, that the Judges became the ones who went home (away from the court proceedings) and started pressing calculators and trying to determine the value of the votes scored by the Candidates is another thing altogether.
..
Like I always maintained..
The Supreme Court would have ordered a re-count or a re-collation..
Uzodimma would have still won.
No problem about that.
But let the right thing be done by the Judges.
..
Look at these conditions below.
They are the conditions a contesting candidate must fulfill before he is declared winner.
..
..
1. The sum of all the votes won by all the contesting parties should be equal to the Total Valid Votes Cast.

2. The sum of the Valid Votes Cast and the Total Rejected (or Voided) Votes should be equal to the Total Votes Cast.

3. The Total Votes Cast should not be more than the Total Accreditated Voters.

4. To be declared winner, in addition to the governorship candidate winning the highest number of votes, he must also win at least ONE-QUARTER of the Total Votes Cast in TWO-THIRDS of all the local government areas in the state.


The figures which the Supreme Court presented, did the judges bother to cross-check the figures to know whether they passed the third and the fourth conditions??
They definitely didn't check the conditions..
(If INEC did a re-count or a re-collation, they must check all the conditions all over again).
..
This had been my argument.
The Supreme Court Judges did the work of INEC, and they ended up making a mess of the job because they don't know the rudiments of Collation of Election Results.
..
Like now, at this very moment, which data would somebody who is doing a research on the results of the Imo State Governorship Election of 2019 work with??
..
Is it the INEC Figure?
Or the Supreme Court Figure?

BluntCrazeMan:
The tribunal and the appeal court didn't cross-examine the documents which Uzodimma presented, neither did they dwell much on determining the authenticity of the figures contained within.
..
The Supreme Court took the figures like that after establishing that INEC erred.
A document whose figures are not confirmed in the lower courts, and yet the Supreme Court didn't make efforts to determine the correctness of the figures??
Who does that?
..
That INEC made a mistake is one thing.
That Uzodimma presented some documents (through the Police) which contained some data about the election is another thing altogether.
Then, that the Judges became the ones who went home (away from the court proceedings) and started pressing calculators and trying to determine the value of the votes scored by the Candidates is another thing altogether.
..
Like I always maintained..
The Supreme Court would have ordered a re-count or a re-collation..
Uzodimma would have still won.
No problem about that.
But let the right thing be done by the Judges.
..
Look at these conditions below.
They are the conditions a contesting candidate must fulfill before he is declared winner.
..
..
1. The sum of all the votes won by all the contesting parties should be equal to the Total Valid Votes Cast.

2. The sum of the Valid Votes Cast and the Total Rejected (or Voided) Votes should be equal to the Total Votes Cast.

3. The Total Votes Cast should not be more than the Total Accreditated Voters.

4. To be declared winner, in addition to the governorship candidate winning the highest number of votes, he must also win at least ONE-QUARTER of the Total Votes Cast in TWO-THIRDS of all the local government areas in the state.


The figures which the Supreme Court presented, did the judges bother to cross-check the figures to know whether they passed the third and the fourth conditions??
They definitely didn't check the conditions..
(If INEC did a re-count or a re-collation, they must check all the conditions all over again).
..
This had been my argument.
The Supreme Court Judges did the work of INEC, and they ended up making a mess of the job because they don't know the rudiments of Collation of Election Results.
..
Like now, at this very moment, which data would somebody who is doing a research on the results of the Imo State Governorship Election of 2019 work with??
..
Is it the INEC Figure?
Or the Supreme Court Figure?

Lol!

I see you are not willing to give up the argument anytime soon.

What I need you to understand is that even if the Imo judgment was flawed, it doesn’t render Justice Tanko incapable of good deeds.

And reprimanding errant judges is a good deed that’s worth all the commendation.

Penguin2:


Lol!

I see you are not willing to give up the argument anytime soon.

What I need you to understand is that even if the Imo judgment was flawed, it doesn’t render Justice Tanko incapable of good deeds.

And reprimanding errant judges is a good deed that’s worth all the commendation.

Heheheheheheheeee..
If your logic is superior to mine, I would have tested all my points with your logic, and if it passed the tests, then I would accept your stand and discard mine.
But you have not actually hit on my argument.
You kept rotating around the main logic with lots of varied points.
..
..
Now, read this.....
This piece is gotten from the presidential tribunal judgement between Atiku-and-Buhari (2019), which our same old dear Tanko and his team-of-Judges upheld at the supreme court. (Pgs.279-&-280 of the tribunal judgement)
..
(... About tendering documents as evidences....)
The maker of such documents should be invited to tender the whole documents and also testify to its contents. And then, where mathematical calculations are involved, how the figures were arrived at must be demonstrated in the open court. The tribunal shouldn't be left to figure out the results by themselves in their chambers.
..
Now, like I said earlier, the figures were not demonstrated in the proceedings of the lower courts.
And also, how the Supreme Court Judges arrived at their own figures were not also demonstrated in the open court..
...
So, as you can see,, the judges flouted a lot of judicial processes in just one single judgement.
..

Penguin2:


Lol!

I see you are not willing to give up the argument anytime soon.

What I need you to understand is that even if the Imo judgment was flawed, it doesn’t render Justice Tanko incapable of good deeds.

And reprimanding errant judges is a good deed that’s worth all the commendation.

No wahalla..
He might still have the intentions of doing good deeds, and he also might have the will and the determination of doing the good deed.
I agree..
..
But at least..
Let him also do the good deed of reprimanding errant judges on himself too, and on all those Judges that supported him in that faulty Imo State Judgement.
..
And all other Judges that passed judgement that are legally and logically flawed.
...
He has good intentions at the moment.
I know.
No problems about that.
..
But then, he should also punish himself for the faulty judgement he once passed some few years ago.
..
That will make me believe that he really has good intentions.