akinsadeez:
Salary Refund? that's weird.

I am of the opinion that the supreme court justices in this case have allowed their emotions to override their sense of law. I quite understand that they are very displeased with Inec's blatant complicity in denying the petitioner his right but they awarded 650,000 naira cost against both Inec and the respondent in this case. The salary refund is like double killing.

The salary that the man was paid was for basically for the services/functions that he rendered as a member of the state house of assembly. Now can the supreme court also order that all comments, arguments that the man proffered on the floor of the house be erased? Can they order that all the bills and motions that the man might have introduced be wiped off the record.

Oyinlola as governor of Osun state had spent almost the four years of his second term before the court declared Aregbesola as the rightfully elected governor. Imagine the court now giving an order that he should return all the salaries he earned for the three years he illegally occupied the seat. To justify that, you have to find a way of also reversing all the projects he did in those three years because he was paid for functioning as the governor.

To me, this seems like another Amaechi kinda judgment. The supreme court might be setting a dangerous precedent.

.

Good judgement

The court should have also given a timeframe, for the refund to be made or risk going to jail. But, here, he will refund through out life.

ayindejimmy:

what u failed to appreciate in this judgement was dat d man was an impostor. He was occupyin dat office illegaly. Nw, wateva he had acquired while illegaly occupyin d office rightfuly belong to the legal occupant. Why do courts confisticate corupt people properties? 4 d same reasons. Those properties were ilegaly acquired. This's d rite precedence and Oyinlola's case shuld also fall in line

No. you are mixing it up. He was occupying the position illegally I completely agree. But he was paid for what he rendered as a mamber. For example, let's say he attended the sitting of the house and participated in house deliberations twice, and he was paid sitting allowance for those two sessions, by law in my humble opinion, it is wrong to ask him to return the sitting allowances because he earned it. It is different from corrupt properties because any property illegally acquired was not earned. Even if the man was illegally there, he worked for the salary he was paid and to justify it you have to find a way of also returning the work that he is which is impossible.

Think of this; the supreme court has never ordered salary refund before even in cases of clear and blatant rigging like Oyinlola's case. You have to ask yourself, why is this case different?

frank442:
P D P again ! People deceiving people. 2015 palaba

did u really read before commenting? Is DPP now same as PDP? I just want to know please.

akinsadeez:
Salary Refund? that's weird.

I am of the opinion that the supreme court justices in this case have allowed their emotions to override their sense of law. I quite understand that they are very displeased with Inec's blatant complicity in denying the petitioner his right but they awarded 650,000 naira cost against both Inec and the respondent in this case. The salary refund is like double killing.

The salary that the man was paid was for basically for the services/functions that he rendered as a member of the state house of assembly. Now can the supreme court also order that all comments, arguments that the man proffered on the floor of the house be erased? Can they order that all the bills and motions that the man might have introduced be wiped off the record.

Oyinlola as governor of Osun state had spent almost the four years of his second term before the court declared Aregbesola as the rightfully elected governor. Imagine the court now giving an order that he should return all the salaries he earned for the three years he illegally occupied the seat. To justify that, you have to find a way of also reversing all the projects he did in those three years because he was paid for functioning as the governor.

To me, this seems like another Amaechi kinda judgment. The supreme court might be setting a dangerous precedent.

I strongly disagree with you on this. The courts verdict was condign apt. The Oyinlolas case was non sequitur because things do change, its now expedient that such punitive measures should be applied to deter people from engaging in reprehensible acts in future.
=
It will now serve as precedent just like Peter Obis case that saw Ngige out of office and gave Obi fresh four years. Like Obis verdic was unprecedented then so is this one now and subsequent judgement will follow suit. The judgement is slick and classic.
=
I endorse this judgement and deem it as virtuoso.

Anaskie:
Very intelligent analysis. I couldn't have said it better. The apex court has just set a very dangerous precedent.
I pray they reverse themselves at the earliest opportunity.

jaymichael:
I think you have a very strong point.

I am very happy that at least some people understand what I am trying to say. I was expecting to be vilified for my comments. You can't mix emotions with law. I also hope the supreme court will reverse themselves at the earliest opportunity.

darlenese:
Refund of salary? How is that possible? They should should also refund the time he spent in the office

Gbam! Simple. infact take 1 million likes

That what should happen to all these yeye politicians

Ha! This is run down believe me, where will he see all the cash?

ayindejimmy:
Supreme court sacks Delta lawmaker, orders salary refund.

The Supreme Court on Friday sacked a member of the Delta State House of Assembly representing Ugelli North Constituency II, Mr. Edoja Akpodiete.
The apex court ordered him to refund to the state coffers all the salaries and allowances he had collected since he had been occupying the seat since 2011.
It was the first time the Supreme Court would be ordering any person to refund the money earned from office that he or she illegally occupied.
In its lead judgement delivered by Justice Walther Onnoghen, the Supreme Court ordered that Mr. Jenkins Gwede of the Democratic Peoples Party to take over the seat from Akpodiete.
The court held that the Independent National Electoral Commission had wrongfully issued the certificate of return to Akpodiete even when it was aware that he had ceased to be the sponsored candidate of the Democratic Peoples Party over 45 days before the state House of Assembly election was conducted on April 26, 2011.
The apex court described INEC’s action as worrisome and therefore awarded a cost of N650,000 each against the electoral body and Edoja.
The court affirmed the documents tendered by Gwede’s lawyer, Mr. Ikhide Ehighelua, showing that the DPP had notified INEC of its choice of Gwede as its candidate after Akpodiete formally withdrew from the election and the party returned the N2m he paid for nomination form to him.
Justice Onnoghen held that the INEC had “foisted on the electorate of Ugelli North Constituency II of Delta State House of Assembly a pretender to the seat who not only withdrew from the election in writing but collected the deposit he paid to the 4th respondent (DPP) for the said election.”
It therefore ordered that the 1st respondent (INEC) to issue the appellant with a certificate of return in respect of the House of Assembly election held on April 26, 2011.
A Federal High Court in Asaba had dismissed Gwede’s case in a judgement delivered on June 27, 2012 for lack of jurisdiction to entertain the matter because it was election related.
Through his lawyer, Mr. Ikhide Ehighelua, Gwede had appealed to the Court of Appeal in Benin which in its judgement delivered on May 22, 2013 had resolved the issues raised in his favour but refused to make any consequential order.
http://www.punchng.com/news/supreme-court-sacks-delta-lawmaker-orders-salary-refund/

We have many of his type in government just fish them out.

hmm if this can be done to all political theifs it will be good. return all the wrongfully possesd money and salaries

akinsadeez:
Salary Refund? that's weird.

I am of the opinion that the supreme court justices in this case have allowed their emotions to override their sense of law. I quite understand that they are very displeased with Inec's blatant complicity in denying the petitioner his right but they awarded 650,000 naira cost against both Inec and the respondent in this case. The salary refund is like double killing.

The salary that the man was paid was for basically for the services/functions that he rendered as a member of the state house of assembly. Now can the supreme court also order that all comments, arguments that the man proffered on the floor of the house be erased? Can they order that all the bills and motions that the man might have introduced be wiped off the record.

Oyinlola as governor of Osun state had spent almost the four years of his second term before the court declared Aregbesola as the rightfully elected governor. Imagine the court now giving an order that he should return all the salaries he earned for the three years he illegally occupied the seat. To justify that, you have to find a way of also reversing all the projects he did in those three years because he was paid for functioning as the governor.

To me, this seems like another Amaechi kinda judgment. The supreme court might be setting a dangerous precedent.

Your argument fails.

If someone steals a vehicle used for taxi-ing, and the courts says he should return the vehicle and all the earnings he earned while using it, do you think it would make sense for him to say "well, the court too should give me back the money I spent refurbishing, pimping and maintaining it before I give it back to the owner"?

The supreme court's decision is appropriate. It simply means that even his contributions to debates and actions as a member of the House were null and void and of no effect as his stay in the house was wrong ab initio. Secondly, it will teach politicians a lesson that as long as they rig themselves into office, it will cost them financially. No one wants to lose money and will this curtail their electoral excesses.

) ; ) U nor try,it remain small.It should rather be,if U hear say he return all d money,make u use pepper water baff.

ayusco85:
If I hear say him return all that money make I nakedd baff

its a good judgment..but the part of *refunding the salary is outrageous*....a labourer deserves his wages....and y dint they pass dis judgment earlier than nw...naija judiciary? ?

Honestly don't think he can refund all salaries and allowances. Good luck to him sha.


Depressing to see some nairalanders still bringing APC/PDP ish on this matter too. Hatred is definitely a disease.

Ilekere:
I understood nothing from what I just read.

And you are happy to displayed your poor comprehension? Do you think it is something to be proud of?

Anaskie:
Very intelligent analysis. I couldn't have said it better. The apex court has just set a very dangerous precedent.
I pray they reverse themselves at the earliest opportunity.

What is intelligent in that analysis? How does the judgement set dangerous precedent? The judgment is just preventing the impostor from benefiting from his fraudulent act! You mean when we see a thief, we should just sentence him to jail? No need to collect the stolen properties from him? Imagine, the rightful owner fought up to The Supreme Court and it took him 3 years and 5 months out of 4 years. They should have charged him interest sef

That is easy nah, just swear an affidavit that you are willing but not able to pay, therefore you will be paying N5 per day till the total amount is completed

oyinlola"s case is quite different,going by the above submission,the supposed law maker gave in writting is intention to withdraw from the election and he did withdraw by accepting the refund of 2million being the cost of his nomination fee.

if INEC had in error issued a certificate of return in his name why did he not refuse it since he never contested for election in the first place.

i therefore uphold the judgement of the supreme court.

akinsadeez:
Salary Refund? that's weird.

I am of the opinion that the supreme court justices in this case have allowed their emotions to override their sense of law. I quite understand that they are very displeased with Inec's blatant complicity in denying the petitioner his right but they awarded 650,000 naira cost against both Inec and the respondent in this case. The salary refund is like double killing.

The salary that the man was paid was for basically for the services/functions that he rendered as a member of the state house of assembly. Now can the supreme court also order that all comments, arguments that the man proffered on the floor of the house be erased? Can they order that all the bills and motions that the man might have introduced be wiped off the record.

Oyinlola as governor of Osun state had spent almost the four years of his second term before the court declared Aregbesola as the rightfully elected governor. Imagine the court now giving an order that he should return all the salaries he earned for the three years he illegally occupied the seat. To justify that, you have to find a way of also reversing all the projects he did in those three years because he was paid for functioning as the governor.

To me, this seems like another Amaechi kinda judgment. The supreme court might be setting a dangerous precedent.

In as much as i admire your intelligence and analytic ability, but i will add that you forget to understand that all cases are not the same. The facts of the cases you quoted may not be same with the facts and circumstances of this case. Judgments are passed in cases based on the peculiar nature of such cases not on the similarity or otherwise.

Sagamite:


Your argument fails.

If someone steals a vehicle used for taxi-ing, and the courts says he should return the vehicle and all the earnings he earned while using it, do you think it would make sense for him to say "well, the court too should give me back the money I spent refurbishing, pimping and maintaining it before I give it back to the owner"?

The two situations don't tally at all. The man who stole the car spent his money on a car which he stole himself and which he knows to be stolen.

In this case, Whichever way you look at it and whether you like it or not, Inec gave the man a certificate of return meaning that as at the time he was being paid he was paid as a legal and legitimate member of the house. That means in law he was being paid legitimately for the services he was rendering as a legislator. It is absolutely different from someone spending money on a car which in the eyes of the law was stolen.


To twist your own example if I buy a car at a public auction and it turns out it was stolen car. If for whatever reason the court asks me to return the car to the rightful owner, it does not make sense for the court to also ask me to return the money I earned using the car. This is because as at the time I was using the car in the eyes of the law I was the rightful owner until the judgment of the court saying otherwise.

The man here earned the salaries as a legislator with a valid INEC certificate. If you have a man who was not declared elected by Inec, but one way or another was able to spend years in office, in that case the court can ask him to refund all salaries because the payment of the salaries itself was illegal.
You have to look at issues deeply from the angle of the law

akinsadeez:
Salary Refund? that's weird.

I am of the opinion that the supreme court justices in this case have allowed their emotions to override their sense of law. I quite understand that they are very displeased with Inec's blatant complicity in denying the petitioner his right but they awarded 650,000 naira cost against both Inec and the respondent in this case. The salary refund is like double killing.

The salary that the man was paid was for basically for the services/functions that he rendered as a member of the state house of assembly. Now can the supreme court also order that all comments, arguments that the man proffered on the floor of the house be erased? Can they order that all the bills and motions that the man might have introduced be wiped off the record.

Oyinlola as governor of Osun state had spent almost the four years of his second term before the court declared Aregbesola as the rightfully elected governor. Imagine the court now giving an order that he should return all the salaries he earned for the three years he illegally occupied the seat. To justify that, you have to find a way of also reversing all the projects he did in those three years because he was paid for functioning as the governor.

To me, this seems like another Amaechi kinda judgment. The supreme court might be setting a dangerous precedent.

m afraid so broda...it's lyk d judge's jt followin his own rule of law,nt d one stipulated in our constitution

akinsadeez:


The two situations don't tally at all. The man who stole the car spent his money on a car which he stole himself and which he knows to be stolen.

In this case, Whichever way you look at it and whether you like it or not, Inec gave the man a certificate of return meaning that as at the time he was being paid he was paid as a legal and legitimate member of the house. That means in law he was being paid legitimately for the services he was rendering as a legislator. It is absolutely different from someone spending money on a car which in the eyes of the law was stolen.


To twist your own example if I buy a car at a public auction and it turns out it was stolen car. If for whatever reason the court asks me to return the car to the rightful owner, it does not make sense for the court to also ask me to return the money I earned using the car. This is because as at the time I was using the car in the eyes of the law I was the rightful owner until the judgment of the court saying otherwise.

The man here earned the salaries as a legislator with a valid INEC certificate. If you have a man who was not declared elected by Inec, but one way or another was able to spend years in office, in that case the court can ask him to refund all salaries because the payment of the salaries itself was illegal.
You have to look at issues deeply from the angle of the law

Mate, are you saying he was not aware he was no more the sponsored candidate of the Democratic Peoples Party before taking his seat?

Has the INEC certificate he got not been declared by the courts as basically fraudulent?

In your twist, you think someone that stole a car can have an argument "he believes he was the legitimate owner"?

He can believe this because the government car registration body gave him certificate of ownership?

anything bad is in our blood

Sagamite:


Mate, are you saying he was not aware he was no more the sponsored candidate of the Democratic Peoples Party before taking his seat?

Has the INEC certificate he got not been declared by the courts as basically fraudulent?

In your twist, you think someone that stole a car can have an argument "he believes he was the legitimate owner"?

He can believe this because the government car registration body gave him certificate of ownership?

Bro, judgment is not retrospective. Whatever the collusion between him and inec, His inec certificate only became fraudulent in the eyes of the law the moment it was declared so by the court and not a minute before. This means that until that very day that he was declared illegal, he had all the rights and privileges of a state legislator.
I didn't give an example of someone who stole a car. I gave an example of someone who bought a car at a legitimate public auction not knowing he was buying a stolen car. Yes, he can argue in court that he bought the car legitimately and was given proper certificates. The best the court can do is to tell him to return the car to the original owner. the court cannot tell him to return money he earned while using the car. Why? Because until the court declared the car to be stolen, he was driving a legitimate car.

akinsadeez:
Salary Refund? that's weird.

I am of the opinion that the supreme court justices in this case have allowed their emotions to override their sense of law. I quite understand that they are very displeased with Inec's blatant complicity in denying the petitioner his right but they awarded 650,000 naira cost against both Inec and the respondent in this case. The salary refund is like double killing.

The salary that the man was paid was for basically for the services/functions that he rendered as a member of the state house of assembly. Now can the supreme court also order that all comments, arguments that the man proffered on the floor of the house be erased? Can they order that all the bills and motions that the man might have introduced be wiped off the record.

Oyinlola as governor of Osun state had spent almost the four years of his second term before the court declared Aregbesola as the rightfully elected governor. Imagine the court now giving an order that he should return all the salaries he earned for the three years he illegally occupied the seat. To justify that, you have to find a way of also reversing all the projects he did in those three years because he was paid for functioning as the governor.

To me, this seems like another Amaechi kinda judgment. The supreme court might be setting a dangerous precedent.

Have you ever heard about deterrent in crime cases?

If such issues like this will continue happening, God has remembered Nigeria then on the purge of curroption.
This will go a long way in solving the problems associated with INEC evil and candidature malpractices during election.

If he cannot refund on time, his properties should be sold to the public for recovery. Simple matter

akinsadeez:

Bro, judgment is not retrospective. Whatever the collusion between him and inec, His inec certificate only became fraudulent in the eyes of the law the moment it was declared so by the court and not a minute before. This means that until that very day that he was declared illegal, he had all the rights and privileges of a state legislator.

What do you mean judgement is not retrospective?

So we can only judge crime that will happen in future, not the one that happened in the past?

If he is aware his sitting there is as a result of a (or his) fraud, he has no entitlement befitting the seat!

akinsadeez:

I didn't give an example of someone who stole a car. I gave an example of someone who bought a car at a legitimate public auction not knowing he was buying a stolen car. Yes, he can argue in court that he bought the car legitimately and was given proper certificates. The best the court can do is to tell him to return the car to the original owner. the court cannot tell him to return money he earned while using the car. Why? Because until the court declared the car to be stolen, he was driving a legitimate car.

Well I gave an example of someone that stole a car that he knows should not be his, just like this guy stole an election that he knows should not be his. Such a person has no recourse to the law for his expenses during his illegal activities but is liable to any loss to another party as a result of it.

Armed robber no fit ask for refund of his bullets before facing death sentence.

A drugs courier cannot ask for refund of his flight ticket from NDLEA because he missed his flight.

Same will soon happen to our own Anambra east and west Constituency, COMRADE TONY NWOYE will soon take over and refund for Cato. Lol.

Sagamite:


What do you mean judgement is not retrospective?

So we can only judge crime that will happen in future, not the one that happened in the past?

If he is aware his sitting there is as a result of a (or his) fraud, he has no entitlement befitting the seat!

It means judgments are deemed to be operational after they are given. They don't work retrospectively.
I have a feeling we will always agree to disagree. let me give a final analogy and rest my case.
A man who kills someone in broad daylight with witnesses around is deemed to be innocent under our law until a competent court declares him guilty. This means he has basically the same rights of any citizen like you and I. Immediately the court pronounces him guilty however, those rights cease, not before.
Same way the election of this man, even though he might have colluded with Inec is still deemed valid and with it all accompanying rights until the supreme court declared otherwise.
There is no allegation here that his Inec certificate was forged. He should not be asked to return salaries earned while he was having a valid certificate. However if he was paid any salary after the court's declaration he is bound to return same.

I rest my case. shalom!