FRESH ELECTION SHOULD BE CONDUCTED

REASONS.
1. APC CANNOT GO TO ELECTION WITH A DEAD CANDIDATE (ASSUMING THEY ARE GOING FOR THE INCONCLUSIVE ELECTION)
2. YOU CANNOT RENOMINATE A CANDIDATE AFTER NAME HAS BEING SUBMITTED TO INEC ( THE DEPUTY CANNOT STAND FOR ELECTION)

Mandate belongs to the party, not a candidate. The supreme court has ruled on this matter. Therefore, the deputy automatically has the mandate.

All dis one wey una dey talk na NEWS also known as story by the common man

dustmalik:
Mandate belongs to the party, not a candidate. The supreme court has ruled on this matter. Therefore, the deputy automatically has the mandate.

no winner right now.

APC HAS NO MANDATE BECAUSE THE ELECTION IS INCONCLUSIVE

NO WINNER HAS EMERGE AS AT THE DEATH OF APC CANDIDATE

Phame:
no winner right now.

That is besides the point. Audu and Falake share a joint-ticket, so, technically, Audu is still alive as long as Falake is alive. Status quo will be maintained by Inec. The inconclusive election shall be concluded.

YOU CANNOT STAND FOR ELECTION WITHOUT A DEPUTY

dustmalik:
That is besides the point. Audu and Falake share a joint-ticket, so, technically, Audu is still alive as long as Falake is alive. Status quo will be maintained by Inec. The inconclusive election shall be concluded.

dustmalik:
Mandate belongs to the party, not a candidate. The supreme court has ruled on this matter. Therefore, the deputy automatically has the mandate.

Which mandate in an election declared inconclusive?

Duru1:


Which mandate in an election declared inconclusive?

The election will be concluded. Status quo will be maintained. use your brain.

denko:
YOU CANNOT STAND FOR ELECTION WITHOUT A DEPUTY

THE ELECTORAL ACT IMPLIES THAT YOU MUST GO TO ELECTION WITH A CANDIDATE AND A RUNNING MATE, GOING A HEAD IT WILL MAKE THE ELECTION NULL AND VOID FOR THE PARTY THEN THE PARTY THAT CAME SECOND WILL BE DECLARE WINNER

dustmalik:

The election will be concluded. Status quo will be maintained. use your brain.

Everyone will be an analyst on the matter again, brainwashing and misleading d populace (vendor stand analysis)
Lawyers please educate D's thread according to happening, experience and constitution

denko:
THE ELECTORAL ACT IMPLIES THAT YOU MUST GO TO ELECTION WITH A CANDIDATE AND A RUNNING MATE, GOING A HEAD IT WILL MAKE THE ELECTION NULL AND VOID FOR THE PARTY THEN THE PARTY THAT CAME SECOND WILL BE DECLARE WINNER

In the same vain. the Supreme court which overrules any other matter, has said the mandate belongs to party, not candidate.

Proving a case without reference to the Nigerian constitution is pure nonsense.

THEN THE PARTY MUST PRESENT TWO ALIVE CANDIDATE FOR THE ELECTION AND IN DOING THAT THE PARTY WILL GET ANOTHER CANDIDATE WHICH GO AGAINST ELECTORAL ACT ON SUBSTITUTION OF CANDIDATE.

dustmalik:

In the same vain. the Supreme court which overrules any other matter, has said the mandate belongs to party, not candidate.

The election has already started and almost concluded statewide. I believe the scores will remain the same since it is the parties that are contesting. If the inconclusive election is finally concluded and the APC wins, the deputy simply assumes the governorship and nominates a deputy.

A PARTY MUST HAVE TWO LIVING CANDIDATE TO GO FOR ELECTION, CANDIDATE AND RUNNING MATE. ELECTORAL ACT 2011.

StOla:
The election has already started and almost concluded statewide. I believe the scores will remain the same since it is the parties that are contesting. If the inconclusive election is finally concluded and the APC wins, the deputy simply assumes the governorship and nominates a deputy.

denko:
A PARTY MUST HAVE TWO LIVING CANDIDATE TO GO FOR ELECTION, CANDIDATE AND RUNNING MATE. ELECTORAL ACT 2011.

Yes the APC did, and elections were held.

Elections are only to be conducted where it was inconclusive.

With the demise of Audu, APC can reshuffle its ticket as it pleases for the remainder votes to be cast.

I watched one data analyst on channels tonight that may have incidentally opened the eyes of the APC to dragging INEC to court to declare their party winner of the election. If Audu has been declared winner it would be a different scenario now.
He said, the sum of votes cast, invalid votes and cancelled vote will be more than total accredited voters by like 20,000. This means that some clarifications are needed on the actual number of cancelled votes and if INEC fails to explain this, the total valid votes may be used and if it should concede to that gap, then Audu may have won.
Now, the timing of INEC announcement of result and reports on Audu's death will determine whether to accept that he should have been declared winner out rightly in first place meaning that his deputy can step into his shoes. Just my opinion.

This is an all or nothing situation. The law and d courts do not countenance an almost concluded or inconclusive election. No party has any mandate until a winner is unequivocally declared. INEC is vested with d power to declare d winner of any election.

Where it is inconclusive as in this case, the prevailing law will guide every election whether supplementary or fresh. The law is that there must be a candidate and running mate who secured d highest votes cast during each party's primaries. Audu Abubakar/APC remain candidate till definite announcement of a winner. This did not happen before d death of a candidate ie Audu.

In the eyes of the law, it is no election if there is only one candidate and that would be the case in a supplementary election with just James Adeleke. Again, an individual that replaces d deceased cannot assume d votes of another candidate though od same party. It is not a mere swap.

In view of current happenings, the most likely scenario will be fresh elections within a stipulated time frame and within which time d parties would have submitted a complete set of candidate n running mate.