GeneralPula:


Right..

But Obi is not a valid member..

After being taught, you are still refusing to learn?

Jogs1900:

If LP updates it's register, did they update the one they submitted to INEC?

Which law said the one with INEC should be updated?

Penguin2:

Which law said the one with INEC should be updated?

This is left for the court to decide since there is no precedence to this .

Jogs1900:

Try to understand me.APC is saying that for your name not to be in the party register, it means you are not a member of that party.(They will argue this)
Now, since you are not a member of LP, you shouldn't have been their presidential candidate.
Since you are not a presidential candidate, you can't challenge the presidential election as a candidate.

If you look at it, LP lawyers objected to the admissibility of the party register as evidencet(Do you think they don't know what they are doing)
I'm sure till now, LP is yet to update it's party register with INEC to include Obis name.

I’ve asked you a question you are not answering.

Labour submitted their register on April 22 and held their presidential primaries on May 30.

Now, which law says Labour Party must not admit new members between April 22 and May 30?

Again, which law says even if someone joins within that timeframe, he’s not eligible to contest an election in that party?

Penguin2:

After being taught, you are still refusing to learn?

Has he proved me wrong?

shortgun:
Something that will just be thrown out for abuse of court process.

1.It's a pre election matter,
2.you have only 14 days to challenge a pre election matter.
3. Only an aspirant in a party that has the locus standi to challenge a candidate of the same party.

That Wole Olanipekun should really go for a brain scan.
A SAN who was busy citing an outdated law that was no longer existing at the tribunal.

Is the drug case, double nomination, dual citizenship a pre election or post elevtion matter.

You obedients only argue to suit you people.

If obi not been in register is a pre election matter, then why do you agree the drug case, double normal, dual citizenship is a post election matters.

Take it or leave it, obi has no case in the court.

He is finished politically.

Hypocrites

Jogs1900:

This is left for the court to decide since there is no precedence to this .

It’s not about precedence, it’s about you citing the law that you want the judiciary to rely on.

Or do you want them to invent it?

Penguin2:

It’s not about precedence, it’s about you citing the law that you want the judiciary to rely on.

Or do you want them to invent it?

Let's see how it will go

Confirmedzombie:


Is the drug case, double nomination, dual citizenship a pre election or post elevtion matter.

You obedients only argue to suit you people.

If obi not been in register is a pre election matter, then why do you agree the drug case, double normal, dual citizenship is a post election matters.

Take it or leave it, obi has no case in the court.

He is finished politically.

Hypocrites

Let me educate you blind supporter.
A pre election matter before the law has to do with how an individual emerged as a party's flag bearer, it's usually an internal affair of the party.Only party members can suffer injury not outsiders
If you are not a party member you are considered a persona non Grata in the affairs of that party.

This is why it is laughable that Tinubu, an APC member through Wole Olanipekun is challenging how a candidate of labour party emerged.....he doesn't have the legal right before the law to question how labour party conducts it's affairs.
Wole Olanipekun is just clutching at straws cos a lawyer of his status should know this.

For the drug case and other cases you mentioned, anyone can sue Tinubu for those.
It's not a party affair.

Hope you understand now or should I get an interpreter?

The APC have no case against Peter Obi but the latter have a watertight case against Mr Balabloo-blu-bulava

shortgun:

Let me educate you blind supporter.
A pre election matter before the law has to do with how an individual emerged as a party's flag bearer, it's usually an internal affair of the party.Only party members can suffer injury not outsiders
If you are not a party member you are considered a persona non Grata in the affairs of that party.

This is why it is laughable that Tinubu, an APC member through Wole Olanipekun is challenging how a candidate of labour party emerged.....he doesn't have the legal right before the law to question how labour party conducts it's affairs.
Wole Olanipekun is just clutching at straws cos a lawyer of his status should know this.

For the drug case and other cases you mentioned, anyone can sue Tinubu for those.
It's not a party affair.

Hope you understand now or should I get an interpreter?

You are the one who is a blind supporter. Let the court decide. Simple.

Penguin2:


For every law, the constitution provides the punishment for not obeying it.

That’s why you see things like 21 years imprisonment, 14, 10 years, etc.

For the elections, you see the Electoral Act specifying disqualification, 10million naira fine, etc, for some offences and for failure to keep to certain provisions.

Now, I ask again, why did the law stipulate as punishment for someone whose name was not found on the register submitted 30 days before elections? Or are you waiting for the judiciary to manufacture punishment out of the thin air for you?

leave these ignoramus agbado people, thier has been extreem commotion in watsapp group since yesterdays KO from OBIs SANs.

GeneralPula:


Right..

But Obi is not a valid member..

Only an Aspirant who participated in the Primary can go to Court for that.

Unfortunately, he ran unopposed so nobody can challenge him.

Like the Shettima double nomination case, it is dead.

See the APC knows it is no case but they want to distract and throw LP off-balance hoping something will stick.

I remember Uncle Wole dragging Livy Uzoukwu in 2019 that his registered name is Livinus and Justice Garba told Chief Wole that one of his counsels backing Buhari was in the same law class with Livy and knows him.

It's law and it's fun..... It's normal!

Penguin2:

Thank you for this detailed analysis as always.

Garfield1
Lotanna2
GeneralPula

But shettima case is not domestic

ezechi242:


leave these ignoramus agbado people, thier has been extreem commotion in watsapp group since yesterdays KO from OBIs SANs.

Lol

fergie001:
Only an Aspirant who participated in the Primary can go to Court for that.

Unfortunately, he ran unopposed so nobody can challenge him.

Like the Shettima double nomination case, it is dead.

See the APC knows it is no case but they want to distract and throw LP off-balance hoping something will stick.

I remember Uncle Wole dragging Livy Uzoukwu in 2019 that his registered name is Livinus and Justice Garba told Chief Wole that one of his counsels backing Buhari was in the same law class with Livy and knows him.

It's law and it's fun..... It's normal!

I know you are of the point of view that a petitioner cannot rely on the weak defence of the defendant to win his case, but do you still think that Obi’s case is “no case” with the weak defence that INEC and Tinubu put up?

Their witnesses kept implicating them in court.

Do you still hold same opinion of this case?

Also, the appellate court held that though the APM alleged that Obi’s name was not on the register the LP submitted to INEC, it failed to present the said register in evidence.

Penguin2:

I know you are of the point of view that a petitioner cannot rely on the weak defence of the defendant to win his case, but do you still think that Obi’s case is “no case” with the weak defence that INEC and Tinubu put up?

Their witnesses kept implicating them in court.

Do you still hold same opinion of this case?

I believe Obi's prayers are:-

1. Tinubu is not qualified to contest the Office of the President.

2. He did not score 25% in FCT

3. There were manipulations in certain PUs/States.

4. Tinubu's $460000 forfeiture

5. Shettima's double nomination

---

I believe the petitioners will want one of these:

-Tinubu be disqualified
-A re-run (I don't know between who and who)
One of Atiku/Obi be declared winner.

---

Following this case and with the weight of evidence, which do you think the Judges will grant!?

Any?
Tbh, none to me.

Great conversations, though Fergie fo appear controversial sometimes 🙌

fergie001:
I believe Obi's prayers are:-

1. Tinubu is not qualified to contest the Office of the President.

2. He did not score 25% in FCT

3. There were manipulations in certain PUs/States.

4. Tinubu's $460000 forfeiture

5. Shettima's double nomination

---

I believe the petitioners will want one of these:

-Tinubu be disqualified
-A re-run (I don't know between who and who)
One of Atiku/Obi be declared winner.

---

Following this case and with the weight of evidence, which do you think the Judges will grant!?

Any?
Tbh, none to me.

Hmmmm!

See, I feel the judiciary is boxed to a corner.

Their integrity has never been more questioned like it’s being questioned now and I feel they must have some compulsion to salvage what is left of their image.

Everyone knows that Obi won the election. Or for some of you who think otherwise, at least you would agree that a lot malpractices took place.

The only reason it’s in contention whether anything will come out of the courts is just because of legal procedures and technicalities. Apart from that, it shouldn’t even be debated whether the courts will declare Obi winner.

Again, don’t forget the EU report which cast the election in bad light. The judiciary is further boxed into not upholding the election or risk inflicting an irreparable damage to its image.

Considering all these therefore, with the facts laid in court so far, I see a rerun, not runoff, where all participants would still participate.

I feel like Tinubu is already envisaging this and that’s why he has been extending hand of friendship to people like Kwankwaso, and packing appointments to Southsouth to try to get the people of the region to his side.

But I won’t be surprised if Tinubu is disqualified.

Just like I still won’t be surprised if the election is upheld (highly unlikely but this is Nigeria).

Penguin2:

Hmmmm!

See, I feel the judiciary is boxed to a corner.

Their integrity has never been more questioned like it’s being questioned now and I feel they must have some compulsion to salvage what is left of their image.

Everyone knows that Obi won the election. Or for some of you who think otherwise, at least you would agree that a lot malpractices took place.

The only reason it’s in contention whether anything will come out of the courts is just because of legal procedures and technicalities. Apart from that, it shouldn’t even be debated whether the courts will declare Obi winner.

Again, don’t forget the EU report which cast the election in bad light. The judiciary is further boxed into not upholding the election or risk inflicting an irreparable damage to its image.

Considering all these therefore, with the facts laid in court so far, I see a rerun, not runoff, where all participants would still participate.

I feel like Tinubu is already envisaging this and that’s why he has been extending hand of friendship to people like Kwankwaso, and packing appointments to Southsouth to try to get the people of the region to his side.

But I won’t be surprised if Tinubu is disqualified.

Just like I still won’t be surprised if the election is upheld (highly unlikely but this is Nigeria).

Saying everyone knows Obi won the election is a bold claim. It depends on who you ask. Many Obidients try to paint Obi as the only Messiah to save Nigeria, and think that everyone see him that way, hence your claim. Elections in Nigeria since 1960 have always been driven by ethnicity and religion. While many people voted for Obi, many more voted against him.

I agree that there were many irregularities in the election. However, how do you prove that all the irregularities favor BAT? The EU report claimed only 31% of the votes are properly counted. How do you prove that all computations favored BAT? Until Obi can prove his case beyond all reasonable doubts, everything peddled on social media is just hearsay. That is how the law works.

Before we all try to blackmail the judiciary, we should know that judgements are given based on incontrovertible facts and evidences which Obi's petition have not been able to provide. In the Western world we all try to quote and emulate, their judges would rather let a criminal go scot free if they can't prove his crime than punish an innocent one. Our judiciary operate in a similar way. The judgement of the PET will be given on the strength of Obi's evidences.

fergie001:
Only an Aspirant who participated in the Primary can go to Court for that.

Unfortunately, he ran unopposed so nobody can challenge him.

Like the Shettima double nomination case, it is dead.

See the APC knows it is no case but they want to distract and throw LP off-balance hoping something will stick.

I remember Uncle Wole dragging Livy Uzoukwu in 2019 that his registered name is Livinus and Justice Garba told Chief Wole that one of his counsels backing Buhari was in the same law class with Livy and knows him.

It's law and it's fun..... It's normal!

Penguin2:

Hmmmm!

See, I feel the judiciary is boxed to a corner.

Their integrity has never been more questioned like it’s being questioned now and I feel they must have some compulsion to salvage what is left of their image.

Everyone knows that Obi won the election. Or for some of you who think otherwise, at least you would agree that a lot malpractices took place.

The only reason it’s in contention whether anything will come out of the courts is just because of legal procedures and technicalities. Apart from that, it shouldn’t even be debated whether the courts will declare Obi winner.

Again, don’t forget the EU report which cast the election in bad light. The judiciary is further boxed into not upholding the election or risk inflicting an irreparable damage to its image.

Considering all these therefore, with the facts laid in court so far, I see a rerun, not runoff, where all participants would still participate.

I feel like Tinubu is already envisaging this and that’s why he has been extending hand of friendship to people like Kwankwaso, and packing appointments to Southsouth to try to get the people of the region to his side.

But I won’t be surprised if Tinubu is disqualified.

Just like I still won’t be surprised if the election is upheld (highly unlikely but this is Nigeria).

1. Tinubu currying Kwankwaso and others is strategic. He has started campaign for 2027, that's how our politicians roll. They think of how to remain there, that's what's in their brains... All of them, bar none.

Come to think of it, we knew there was a glitch, we knew it was human error and deliberate to favour the incumbent President's Party, but if you opt for a run-off, which State and which will it not take place?

The only option is to cancel the General Election in totality which 99.99999% CANNOT HAPPEN. Who will bring money for another election? So what's the alternative? The evidence will now go to States.... How will the petitioners prove that a State like Rivers will substantially affect the whole election. That's hard to believe.

At the tribunal in 2007, the only dissent was from Justice Sylvanus Nsofor (of blessed memory) who ruled that the whole election be cancelled. Infact, in his written judgement, he wrote: "May Nigeria never witness a day like April 21, 2007"

Whilst the leading judgement opted for cancellation in Imo and Edo or Ogun (can't remember).

The only realistic options before us today is

i. a total cancellation of the election and/or
ii. a disqualification of Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

(So which is more likelier from the evidence adduced so far).

That Tinubu did not win the majority of votes will be very difficult to prove because how can you produce BVAS machines or CTCs of PUs where the alleged fraud took place, how many? This is not a Governorship Election... It is over 176k+ PUs (So it's a win and others go to Court situation)

If you say the integrity of the Judiciary have not been questioned before as of now, then you didn't follow that of 2007. No election can be worse than that, making a sitting President, the major beneficiary, to openly admit it. The SC even decided 4-3, you and I know this heavily padded SC will not do that irrespective the apparent irregularities.

(The only difference is the social media presence and the focus from the youths).

2. Tinubu going to the SS is also a strategic one because he wants to break the stranglehold of the opposition (this is what he does best).
He was really surprised at their performance for him in this election. The SS delivered for him and they are the new bride. Except Bayelsa, they produced Senators in all the States...
Edo - 2, AKS - 1, CRS - 2, Delta - 2, Rivers - (potential 3).

He knows that politically speaking, the SE will be in seeming opposition to him, that's a fact. So he needs to break those ranks at all costs!

Again, the focus for Obi and Atiku have now shifted to the qualifications of Bola Tinubu with regards to his been female, forfeiture and whether indeed he graduated from CSU or NYSC exemption etc.

The Judges will work on the facts and again, realistically knowing fully well that we are talking about a sitting President here.... At least 2 of those Judges will likely be heading to the SC in the next batch (We know them already) via the signature of the man who is sitting there, so he is already 1-up.

Now to the Qualifications issue:

1. The issue of Shettima's double nomination has been settled at the Supreme Court.

2. The issue of 25% of FCT will be shut down. I find it a bit absurd for one State to hold the Country hostage in an election, I will prefer them to use God's own State rather than the Centre of Unity. The mischief rule will definitely be introduced.

Come to think of it, if Tinubu doesn't get 25% what happens... A re-run in FCT alone? or the person who got 25% should be made President? or how will it be done? So if there is a re-run and he continues to get less than 25% what happens?

3. Over-voting or non-accreditation in PUs will be difficult to prove because following the SC decisions in Oyetola v Adeleke, you need the BVAS machines or CTC reports that will comfortably show substantial non-compliance.

Again, there has to be enough PU results tendered, just enough to tilt the balance or show that indeed if the votes were added the petitioner(s) indeed stood a real chance. Across 176k+ PUs, that is a tall order.

4. On the issue of $460,000 forfeiture.... In criminal cases everything must add up. One of the cardinal principles of criminal suits is that it is better to set an accused free than to sentence an innocent.

I don't want to delve too much in that, but was Tinubu CONVICTED in 1993? (That's the only answer the PEPT will want to know).

5. On the issue of alleged forgery of his documents.....

The SC was emphatic in Oyetola v Adeleke, Dantiye v APC, Dankwambo v Abubakar, Agi v PDP, APC v Elebeke, Abubakar v INEC, Maihaja v Geidam, APC v Obaseki, Mohammed v Wamakko

The basic proof that any document in question is forged is a DISCLAIMER from the awarding Institution. Without any disclaimer from these Institutions affirming there was some form of forgery, makes it a basket case of speculations.

I will leave you to know the probable direction this case will head to.

fergie001:


1. Tinubu currying Kwankwaso and others is political. He has started campaign for 2027, that's how our politicians think. They think of how to remain there, that's all in their brains... All of them, bar none

Come to think of it, we knew there was a glitch, we knew it was human error and deliberate to favour the incumbent President's Party, but if you opt for a run-off, which State and which will it not take place?

The only option is to cancel the General Election in totality which 99.99999% CANNOT HAPPEN. Who will bring money for another election? So what's the alternative? The evidence will now go to States.... How will the petitioners prove that a State like Rivers will substantially affect the whole election. That's hard to believe.

At the tribunal in 2007, the only dissent was from Justice Sylvanus Nsofor (of blessed memory) who ruled that the whole election be cancelled. Infact, in his written judgement, he wrote: "May Nigeria never witness a day like April 21, 2007"

Whilst the leading judgement opted for cancellation in Imo and Edo or Ogun (can't remember).

The only realistic options before us today is

i. a total cancellation of the election and/or
ii. a disqualification of Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

(So which is more likelier from the evidence adduced so far).

That Tinubu did not win the majority of votes will be very difficult to prove because how can you produce BVAS machines or CTCs of PUs where the alleged fraud took place, how many? This is not a Governorship Election... It is over 176k+ PUs (So it's win and others go to Court situation)

If you say the integrity of the Judiciary have not been questioned before as of now, then you didn't follow that of 2007. No election can be worse than that, making a sitting President, the major beneficiary, to openly admit it. The SC even decided 4-3, you and I know this heavily padded SC will not do that irrespective the apparent irregularities.

(The only difference is the social media presence and the focus from the youths).

2. Tinubu going to the SS is strategic because he wants to break the stranglehold of the opposition e was really surprised at their performance for him in this election. The SS delivered for him and they are the new bride. Except Bayelsa, they produced Senators in all the States...
Edo - 2, AKS - 1, CRS - 2, Delta - 2, Rivers - (potential 3).

He knows that politically speaking, the SE will be in seeming opposition to him, that's a fact. So he needs to break those ranks at all costs!

Again, the focus for Obi and Atiku have now shifted to the qualifications of Bola Tinubu with regards to his been female, forfeiture and whether indeed he graduated from CSU or NYSC exemption etc.

The Judges will work on the facts and again, realistically knowing fully well that we are talking about a sitting President here.... At least 2 of those Judges will likely be heading to the SC in the next batch (I will not mention the names here) via the signature of the man who is sitting there, so he is already 1-up.

Now to the Qualifications issue:

1. The issue of Shettima's double nomination has been settled at the Supreme Court.

2. The issue of 25% of FCT will be shut down. I find it a bit absurd for one State to hold the Country hostage in an election, I will prefer them to use God's own State rather than the Centre of Unity. The mischief rule will definitely be introduced.

Come to think of it, if Tinubu doesn't get 25% what happens... A re-run in FCT alone? or the person who got 25% should be made President? or how will it be done? So if there is a re-run and he continues to get less than 25% what happens?

3. Over-voting or non-accreditation in PUs will be difficult to prove because following the SC decisions in Oyetola v Adeleke, you need the BVAS machines or CTC reports that will comfortably show substantial non-compliance.

Again, there has to be enough PU results tendered, just enough to tilt the balance or show that indeed if the votes were added the petitioner(s) indeed stood a real chance. Across 176k+ PUs, that is a tall order.

4. On the issue of $460,000 forfeiture.... In criminal cases everything must add up. One of the cardinal principles of criminal suits is that it is better to set an accused free than to sentence an innocent.

I don't want to delve too much in that, but was Tinubu CONVICTED in 1993? (That's the only answer the PEPT will want to know).

5. On the issue of alleged forgery of his documents.....

The SC was emphatic in Oyetola v Adeleke, Dantiye v APC, Dankwambo v Abubakar, Agi v PDP, APC v Elebeke, Abubakar v INEC, Maihaja v Geidam, APC v Obaseki, Mohammed v Wamakko

The basic proof that any document in question is forged is a DISCLAIMER from the awarding Institution. Without any disclaimer from these Institutions affirming there was some form of forgery, makes it a basket case of speculations.

I will leave you to know the probable direction the tribunal will head to.

Great analysis.

Re:FCT; the constitution already explains what should happen if no one wins on the first ballot so that’s not a problem. The only issue is interpreting if FCT is required or not

Re:Kwankwaso; you’re right, if the north decides to revolt against Tinubu, Kwankwaso will be well positioned to lead it. He is already outside the party. He already has a strong base. He can try to unite with Tinubu’s opposition in the SE, SS, NC. It is in Tinubu’s best interest to bring him closer.

Re:Tribunal; it’s clear the election was rigged to favour the ruling party but proving it is hard, and proving that you won outright is botherline impossible. I supported Obi and I’m inclined to believe him but I haven’t seen enough evidence that he won outright so what hope does he have to prove that to a court that is meant to be unbiased. The best hope is a rerun/disqualification. The court surely shouldn’t concern themselves with what happens afterwards though (money for another election etc) but I guess it’s only human nature.

Aww

wegevv:
Re:FCT; the constitution already explains what should happen if no one wins on the first ballot so that’s not a problem. The only issue is interpreting if FCT is required or not

Re-run between who and who?

The 1st and 2nd who didn't get 25% or all of them. If in the event of a re-run amongst them and Obi wins FCT again, will he be pronounced President?

Does the Constitution say anybody who wins FCT wins the Presidency? NO.

Re:Tribunal; it’s clear the election was rigged to favour the ruling party but proving it is hard, and proving that you won outright is botherline impossible. I supported Obi and I’m inclined to believe him but I haven’t seen enough evidence that he won outright so what hope does he have to prove that to a court that is meant to be unbiased. The best hope is a rerun/disqualification. The court surely shouldn’t concern themselves with what happens afterwards though (money for another election etc) but I guess it’s only human nature.

You have summarised the whole thing at the bolded.

fergie001:

Re-run between who and who?

The 1st and 2nd who didn't get 25% or all of them. If in the event of a re-run amongst them and Obi wins FCT again, will he be pronounced President?

Does the Constitution say anybody who wins FCT wins the Presidency? NO.

If the courts decide that FCT is requirement then there is no winner based on INEC's declared results because Tinubu secured the popular vote so others didn't. I have to check again but my understanding is it would be a rerun between the person who got the popular vote and the person with the most spread. So ignoring everything else that would be a head to head between Tinubu (popular vote) and whoever got the most spread between Obi and Atiku. The second ballot is strictly popular vote. No other requirements are there.

Anyway I suspect the courts will rule that FCT is not required so this is probably all irrelevant

wegevv:
Anyway I suspect the courts will rule that FCT is not required so this is probably all irrelevant

I stay with this.

Penguin2:

Hmmmm!

See, I feel the judiciary is boxed to a corner.

Their integrity has never been more questioned like it’s being questioned now and I feel they must have some compulsion to salvage what is left of their image.

Everyone knows that Obi won the election. Or for some of you who think otherwise, at least you would agree that a lot malpractices took place.

The only reason it’s in contention whether anything will come out of the courts is just because of legal procedures and technicalities. Apart from that, it shouldn’t even be debated whether the courts will declare Obi winner.

Again, don’t forget the EU report which cast the election in bad light. The judiciary is further boxed into not upholding the election or risk inflicting an irreparable damage to its image.

Considering all these therefore, with the facts laid in court so far, I see a rerun, not runoff, where all participants would still participate.

I feel like Tinubu is already envisaging this and that’s why he has been extending hand of friendship to people like Kwankwaso, and packing appointments to Southsouth to try to get the people of the region to his side.

But I won’t be surprised if Tinubu is disqualified.

Just like I still won’t be surprised if the election is upheld (highly unlikely but this is Nigeria).

You are funny.has the eu ever written good about our polls? No one is being boxed.you heard how the apex court attacked the pdp during shettima case due to the media propaganda and you are still indulging in it...
The best time to disqualify tinubu was during the shettima case not now.besides the fact that there is no case here,how do you reason? You funny,that the court will remove a president.how na?

fergie001:


1. Tinubu currying Kwankwaso and others is strategic. He has started campaign for 2027, that's how our politicians roll. They think of how to remain there, that's what's in their brains... All of them, bar none.

Come to think of it, we knew there was a glitch, we knew it was human error and deliberate to favour the incumbent President's Party, but if you opt for a run-off, which State and which will it not take place?

The only option is to cancel the General Election in totality which 99.99999% CANNOT HAPPEN. Who will bring money for another election? So what's the alternative? The evidence will now go to States.... How will the petitioners prove that a State like Rivers will substantially affect the whole election. That's hard to believe.

At the tribunal in 2007, the only dissent was from Justice Sylvanus Nsofor (of blessed memory) who ruled that the whole election be cancelled. Infact, in his written judgement, he wrote: "May Nigeria never witness a day like April 21, 2007"

Whilst the leading judgement opted for cancellation in Imo and Edo or Ogun (can't remember).

The only realistic options before us today is

i. a total cancellation of the election and/or
ii. a disqualification of Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

(So which is more likelier from the evidence adduced so far).

That Tinubu did not win the majority of votes will be very difficult to prove because how can you produce BVAS machines or CTCs of PUs where the alleged fraud took place, how many? This is not a Governorship Election... It is over 176k+ PUs (So it's a win and others go to Court situation)

If you say the integrity of the Judiciary have not been questioned before as of now, then you didn't follow that of 2007. No election can be worse than that, making a sitting President, the major beneficiary, to openly admit it. The SC even decided 4-3, you and I know this heavily padded SC will not do that irrespective the apparent irregularities.

(The only difference is the social media presence and the focus from the youths).

2. Tinubu going to the SS is also a strategic one because he wants to break the stranglehold of the opposition (this is what he does best).
He was really surprised at their performance for him in this election. The SS delivered for him and they are the new bride. Except Bayelsa, they produced Senators in all the States...
Edo - 2, AKS - 1, CRS - 2, Delta - 2, Rivers - (potential 3).

He knows that politically speaking, the SE will be in seeming opposition to him, that's a fact. So he needs to break those ranks at all costs!

Again, the focus for Obi and Atiku have now shifted to the qualifications of Bola Tinubu with regards to his been female, forfeiture and whether indeed he graduated from CSU or NYSC exemption etc.

The Judges will work on the facts and again, realistically knowing fully well that we are talking about a sitting President here.... At least 2 of those Judges will likely be heading to the SC in the next batch (We know them already) via the signature of the man who is sitting there, so he is already 1-up.

Now to the Qualifications issue:

1. The issue of Shettima's double nomination has been settled at the Supreme Court.

2. The issue of 25% of FCT will be shut down. I find it a bit absurd for one State to hold the Country hostage in an election, I will prefer them to use God's own State rather than the Centre of Unity. The mischief rule will definitely be introduced.

Come to think of it, if Tinubu doesn't get 25% what happens... A re-run in FCT alone? or the person who got 25% should be made President? or how will it be done? So if there is a re-run and he continues to get less than 25% what happens?

3. Over-voting or non-accreditation in PUs will be difficult to prove because following the SC decisions in Oyetola v Adeleke, you need the BVAS machines or CTC reports that will comfortably show substantial non-compliance.

Again, there has to be enough PU results tendered, just enough to tilt the balance or show that indeed if the votes were added the petitioner(s) indeed stood a real chance. Across 176k+ PUs, that is a tall order.

4. On the issue of $460,000 forfeiture.... In criminal cases everything must add up. One of the cardinal principles of criminal suits is that it is better to set an accused free than to sentence an innocent.

I don't want to delve too much in that, but was Tinubu CONVICTED in 1993? (That's the only answer the PEPT will want to know).

5. On the issue of alleged forgery of his documents.....

The SC was emphatic in Oyetola v Adeleke, Dantiye v APC, Dankwambo v Abubakar, Agi v PDP, APC v Elebeke, Abubakar v INEC, Maihaja v Geidam, APC v Obaseki, Mohammed v Wamakko

The basic proof that any document in question is forged is a DISCLAIMER from the awarding Institution. Without any disclaimer from these Institutions affirming there was some form of forgery, makes it a basket case of speculations.

I will leave you to know the probable direction this case will head to.

What I’ve discovered is that most of your arguments on this PEPT case is centred around political expediency rather than legality and constitutionality.

First, on the FCT argument, Tinubu’s witness came to court with a document from a Committee that was setup solely for the place of the FCT in the Nigerian State. From the document, it was stated that the Committee recommended that Abuja be given a Special Status in the constitution since it’s our center of unity. Does that not prove that that constitutional provision “AND The FCT” was a deliberate provision by the framers of the constitution relying on the recommendations of the committee on FCT? If yes, why should someone who didn’t fulfill that provision be declared winner?

See, after finding out that there was actually a committee that recommended that Abuja be given a Special Status, I now realized why Atiku and Obi made it one of the focal point of their petitions.

Based on that FCT provision alone, a runoff election could be ordered by the courts. Because while Tinubu got simple majority, he failed to fulfill the spread having failed to get 25% in the FCT.

Now, in case a runoff election is ordered, who would square with Tinubu? The constitution says it’s the person that won the most state (not the person that came second). Now, considering that they all tied at 12 states each at the end of the election, what Obi needs to do is to prove that truly he won Rivers; that shoots him up to 13 states. If he’s able to recover Benue, Akwa Ibom and Taraba like he’s also contesting, that shoots him up to 16 states.

So, the runoff would now be between Tinubu and Obi. That’s supposing that after recovering 4 states, Obi is still not able to offset Tinubu’s lead, and also supposing that Tinubu is not disqualified.

Now, what did the constitution say about a runoff election? The constitution said the winner would then be determined by simple majority. No question of spread this time around. Which is why I was surprised you asked if they would keep repeating the election if the winner continues to fail to get 25% in Abuja.

Now, Can Tinubu be disqualified based on the evidence in court?

Now, I wouldn’t say I have an answer to the above question. But do you recall Tinubu lawyers’ argument about Tinubu’s $460,000 forfeiture during Pre-hearing? They said it was Tinubu’s bank account that was sued and not Tinubu. But yesterday, their witness, a lawyer in America, admitted in court that it was indeed Tinubu that forfeited the money but then argued that it was a “civil forfeiture”. But do you remember Justice Ariwoola’s definition of forfeiture?

Again, about his certificates, PDP is not questioning the authenticity of Tinubu’s certificates. PDP is not saying that Tinubu didn’t go to CSU. If PDP was questioning the authenticity of Tinubu’s certificates, that’s the only time you would have suggested that CSU should have been called to disprove the documents as inauthentic.

But PDP submitted Certified True Copies (public document) from CSU that showed that the Tinubu that attended their institution was female. The implication is that whilst the certificates Tinubu is parading are authentic, they belong to a woman.

Now, this is antithetical to the Tinubu who registered with APC as male. Their honorable justices know that the Bola Tinubu that was sworn in as Nigeria’s president is a man. How do you reconcile that?

Lastly, Tinubu submitted an exemption certificates dated 1983 but NYSC started giving exemption certificates in 1985. But I don’t even think that’s what PDP is contesting if not, they would have callled an NYSC official to testify that truly the Service started giving exemptions in 1985, not 1985. I think PDP is contesting that the gender on Tinubu’s NYSC certificate which was submitted to INEC, is female. Now, do you need NYSC to come testify that truly what is written on a certificate is female?

Do you honestly think that the courts will exonerate all these?

Penguin2:

What I’ve discovered is that most of your arguments on this PEPT case is centred around political expediency rather than legality and constitutionality.

First, on the FCT argument, Tinubu’s witness came to court with a document from a Committee that was setup solely for the place of the FCT in the Nigerian State. From the document, it was stated that the Committee recommended that Abuja be given a Special Status in the constitution since it’s our center of unity. Does that not prove that that constitutional provision “AND The FCT” was a deliberate provision by the framers of the constitution relying on the recommendations of the committee on FCT? If yes, why should someone who didn’t fulfill that provision be declared winner?

See, after finding out that there was actually a committee that recommended that Abuja be given a Special Status, I now realized why Atiku and Obi made it one of the focal point of their petitions.

Based on that FCT provision alone, a runoff election could be ordered by the courts. Because while Tinubu got simple majority, he failed to fulfill the spread having failed to get 25% in the FCT.

Now, in case a runoff election is ordered, who would square with Tinubu? The constitution says it’s the person that won the most state (not the person that came second). Now, considering that they all tied at 12 states each at the end of the election, what Obi needs to do is to prove that truly he won Rivers; that shoots him up to 13 states. If he’s able to recover Benue, Akwa Ibom and Taraba like he’s also contesting, that shoots him up to 16 states.

So, the runoff would now be between Tinubu and Obi. That’s supposing that after recovering 4 states, Obi is still not able to offset Tinubu’s lead, and also supposing that Tinubu is not disqualified.

Now, what did the constitution say about a runoff election? The constitution said the winner would then be determined by simple majority. No question of spread this time around. Which is why I was surprised you asked if they would keep repeating the election if the winner continues to fail to get 25% in Abuja.

Now, Can Tinubu be disqualified based on the evidence in court?

Now, I wouldn’t say I have an answer to the above question. But do you recall Tinubu lawyers’ argument about Tinubu’s $460,000 forfeiture during Pre-hearing? They said it was Tinubu’s bank account that was sued and not Tinubu. But yesterday, their witness, a lawyer in America, admitted in court that it was indeed Tinubu that forfeited the money but then argued that it was a “civil forfeiture”. But do you remember Justice Ariwoola’s definition of forfeiture?

Again, about his certificates, PDP is not questioning the authenticity of Tinubu’s certificates. PDP is not saying that Tinubu didn’t go to CSU. If PDP was questioning the authenticity of Tinubu’s certificates, that’s the only time you would have suggested that CSU should have been called to disprove the documents as inauthentic.

But PDP submitted Certified True Copies (public document) from CSU that showed that the Tinubu that attended their institution was female. The implication is that whilst the certificates Tinubu is parading are authentic, they belong to a woman.

Now, this is antithetical to the Tinubu who registered with APC as male. Their honorable justices know that the Bola Tinubu that was sworn in as Nigeria’s president is a man. How do you reconcile that?

Lastly, Tinubu submitted an exemption certificates dated 1983 but NYSC started giving exemption certificates in 1985. But I don’t even think that’s what PDP is contesting if not, they would have callled an NYSC official to testify that truly the Service started giving exemptions in 1985, not 1985. I think PDP is contesting that the gender on Tinubu’s NYSC certificate which was submitted to INEC, is female. Now, do you need NYSC to come testify that truly what is written on a certificate is female?

Do you honestly think that the courts will exonerate all these?

The court will shoot down the fct matter,deep inside you you know this.asduming there's a rerun between tinubu and obi,it will be a massacre.
The gender on his nysc is not female.failure to call nysc killed it.failure to call southwest college or CSU to verify the gender also killed it.besides,wole submitted his admission letter which shows male.
Forfeiture is not a ground for disq.the court will only concern themselves with conviction or not...even if it was a punishment,atiku start witness agreed that it wasn't registered here.we haven't even talked about whether it applies to Nigeria.
Worst case scenario is rerun in 18000 units where tinubu will still win.there is nothing in this case,take your mind elsewhere.the buhari case of 2019 was more difficult

Lotanna2:


The court will shoot down the fct matter,deep inside you you know this.asduming there's a rerun between tinubu and obi,it will be a massacre.
The gender on his nysc is not female.failure to call nysc killed it.failure to call southwest college or CSU to verify the gender also killed it.besides,wole submitted his admission letter which shows male.
Forfeiture is not a ground for disq.the court will only concern themselves with conviction or not...even if it was a punishment,atiku start witness agreed that it wasn't registered here.we haven't even talked about whether it applies to Nigeria.
Worst case scenario is rerun in 18000 units where tinubu will still win.there is nothing in this case,take your mind elsewhere.the buhari case of 2019 was more difficult

How come you sound so sure of what the judges will decide? Do you have the judgment already?

About 25% in FCT, I’ve not mentioned that there’s a Supreme Court precedent on it. It was set in 2008 in a case between Yaradua and Buhari where the Supreme Court ruled that it is not mandatory to win the FCT before you are declared winner of the election; however, it’s is mandatory to get 25% in the FCT.

The made the above ruling because Buhari was challenging the election based on the fact that Yaradua did not win in Abuja but INEC declared him.

What do you say about that?