Am only sorry for wike come 2019

I was told same in Ogbia, Bayelsa during INEC training. The reason is simple to comprehend. There is a legislative provision for Voters' Register and none for Card Reader. Think of a unit in ward 3, Ogbia which was configured for a different unit. No admin across the sea. As a presiding officer, would you disenfranchise a unit when you have the register and the incident forms. We can press for the card reader in subsequent amendment of the Electoral Act. For now, the supreme court is godly.

wow

web2X:
The card readers had various types of problems. I witnessed one that was configured for a different unit.

the card is a machine and it's bound to be faulty, if its faulty used the voters register but our lordship said it does not support the voters register,so those that clone PVC can have their way and agent and politician can vote for voters on proxy.

Oluwamuyeewa:


Can you give me a reason to vote for Bruce??

Who need your vote?
Please shove it.. U know where..

Come 2019, vote Bubu again.. Ok

That's if dizziness from long time hunger that is about to befall this gaad-dern country will allow anyone stand the queue to vote.

BenBruce4Presdt:



Who need your vote?
Please shove it.. U know where..

Come 2019, vote Bubu again.. Ok

That's if dizziness from long time hunger that is about to befall this gaad-dern country will allow anyone stand the queue to vote.

Lol in my face just like I expected

You're just not good enough for this campaign job you awarded yourself

Very absured and peverse judgement.

doctokwus:
Selective use of the electoral act by the SCJ.
No where is law interpreted without taking reality into play.
No matter how some try to rationalize this,the supreme court has taken us back to 2007.
For those claiming the sc interpreted the law rightly, can anyone explain under which provision in the constitution the SC ruled that Peter Odili had perpetual injunction from being prosecuted?
Just as that of Odili was wrong, these election ruling in Rivers and Akwa Ibom are also wrong and no one shud justify the SC!

... I commend to u d infallible dictum of Kayode Eso JSC (now reruicicat in peace) in Adigun V. A.G. Oyo State. He said thus: The Supreme Court is a super court and all d Justices are super men.They don't err and even when dey do, it becomes law. The law is law no matter how hard it appears.
Mind you, the Supreme Court will only invoke the doctrine of necessity or consider public policy when the interest and unity of the nation is at stake. And in this case there was nothing to portray or insinuate the aforesaid.
What the erstwhile INEC chairman would have done was to make sure the new guidelines visaviz the introduction of the card reader was interto incorporated into the Electoral Act and this he would have done by simply forwarding a bill to the National Assembly to amend same. A mere administrative guideline can never supersede the provisions of an Act of Parliament. Hope you understand why and how. Thanks. I rise.

bettercreature:
Gang of robbers,You just signed death warrant of several innocent people comes 2019

No more reliance on tribunal all electoral malpractices will be settled on election day


Nobody has monopoly of violence,Wike will meet us there in 2019

my fear though, , ,

IrradiatoR:


my fear though, , ,

My dear the best thing one can do at this Junction, is to posit that INEC forthwith, forwards a bill for An Act to Amend the provisions of Electoral Act (as amended), to incorporate and make provisions for the electronic card reader and let them start early enough by start working the configuration of same to avoid the problems of 2015.

Oluwamuyeewa:


Lol in my face just like I expected

You're just not good enough for this campaign job you awarded yourself

Say what ever, this is a moniker.. OK, do you want me to spell it for you, "M O N I K E R".

I love BenBruce, but he never asked me to campaign for him or anything.. Get a life brother..


Just try a dose of his commonsense because and see if you life will ever remain the same..

linearity:


I don't think that is what the judgement said, in summary, it is saying that; the card reader can be used side by side with the voters' register; but if there is a dispute or discrepancy, the voters' register supersedes.

In essence, I cannot be denied the right to cast my vote, if the card reader invalidates me, but my name is on the voters' register; which makes a lot of sense.

Even in the US, electronic machines are not used to validate voters on Election Day....when you go to your district to vote, your name will be manually lookup on the district hard copy printed voters' register and you will be asked to sign against your name on that printout before a voter's ballot will be giving to you, which you will tender at the entrance of the voting booth before been allowed to vote.

Sure, however you failed to recognise that for your name to be on that Voters Register, you need to have a Social Security Number!

For us in Nigeria, that Voters Card was the SSN. How do you decide that a Kehinde Taiwo is different from a Taiwo Kehinde when there is nothing to rely on other than a piece of paper?

The justices just took this nation backwards, they've truncated our March to a better society governed by truth and desirous of progress.

It is a sad day indeed.

web2X:
The card readers had various types of problems. I witnessed one that was configured for a different unit.

Phones and computers have various types of problems. Heck, vehicles have numerous kind of problems, should we go back to our legs and hands as that is what is written in the Bible?

SMH.

klassic:


... I commend to u d infallible dictum of Kayode Eso JSC (now reruicicat in peace) in Adigun V. A.G. Oyo State. He said thus: The Supreme Court is a super court and all d Justices are super men.They don't err and even when dey do, it becomes law. The law is law no matter how hard it appears.
Mind you, the Supreme Court will only invoke the doctrine of necessity or consider public policy when the interest and unity of the nation is at stake. And in this case there was nothing to portray or insinuate the aforesaid.
What the erstwhile INEC chairman would have done was to make sure the new guidelines visaviz the introduction of the card reader was interto incorporated into the Electoral Act and this he would have done by simply forwarding a bill to the National Assembly to amend same. A mere administrative guideline can never supersede the provisions of an Act of Parliament. Hope you understand why and how. Thanks. I rise.

All well and good.
But I just have one question for u:under which provision in the constitution,an act, technicalities or anything near to it did the same supreme court give a judgement that gave PERPETUAL injunction from INVESTIGATION to fmr gov Peter Odili?
It's easy for people to use technicalities to justify a wrong decision,but it takes courage to do what is right,because if one is to go by your line of argument then even a murderer caught at the scene and in the act of the murder can also be freed by this same Supreme Court,by merely cleverly interpreting some section of d criminal act to justify the murder!

BenBruce4Presdt:



Say what ever, this is a moniker.. OK, do you want me to spell it for you, "M O N I K E R".

I love BenBruce, but he never asked me to campaign for him or anything.. Get a life brother..


Just try a dose of his commonsense because and see if you life will ever remain the same..

Interesting
If only you're not suffering from bibliophobia you'll see where I implied that you awarded yourself the job...Bruce is too smart to make you campaign for him lol

I am not a lawyer but i think the supreme court erred in its decision.

Imagine it like this; my boss (FG) asked me (INEC) to distribute some cash to a list (voters register) of people (voters). In the past, i messed up everything as people claimed to be others and collected cash that belongs to someone else. Those who didnt get their share were furious on my boss and me. So i deviced a means (card reader) to identify the people in the true list and it was successful. I handled the list better than before but the impersonators reported to my boss's business partner (Supreme court) that my father and me decided to use a different means instead of just giving anybody who came. Now, my boss's businesses partner ordered me to give it to anybody even if his name is not verified to be on the list.

Isnt my boss's business colleague encouraging thieves.
How will his instruction help the purpose (free and fair elections) for which the money is being distributed?

INEC didnt go out of the law, it is just for supreme court to do the right thing by making the card reader law. Whatever the card reader is, it never surplanted the voters register but made it sacrosanct.

Its also like dismissing the case of a murderer caught in the act with all the evidence on a technicality that his rights were not read to him. How has justice been served and how will justice be served in future?

Unless the National assembly comes into this matter, election rigging has been legalised by the supreme court's action.

doctokwus:
Selective use of the electoral act by the SCJ.
No where is law interpreted without taking reality into play.
No matter how some try to rationalize this,the supreme court has taken us back to 2007.
For those claiming the sc interpreted the law rightly, can anyone explain under which provision in the constitution the SC ruled that Peter Odili had perpetual injunction from being prosecuted?
Just as that of Odili was wrong, these election ruling in Rivers and Akwa Ibom are also wrong and no one shud justify the SC!

Exactly! They even knew that their decision will become law or lead to abolishing the card reader that is universally accepted as a good development in our elections. Is like saying rigging is better.

Caseless:
yeah, it is, but you have something to learn from it. I had to put it all out here cos as much as I hate the judgements , this report changed my thoughts about them.
I don't think if you read this, you have any reason to wait for details that will be released on 12th of this month.


Where's lalasticlala and mynd44 sef? Keneking , help me call them abeg.

But this has nothing to do with the violent part of the elections. Many pple lost their lives and nothing was said about that. Recall the elections petition tribunals of akwa ibom and rivers moved to abj because of violence during the elections. Having explained the reason for discarding the card reader they shuld do same for ignoring the violence and over voting which characterised the elections in some disputed states.

vicboy12:
Am only sorry for wike come 2019

Am sure by then apc will be dead. i

olajizz01:
Hope PDP wont wails till eternity in the next election when APC uses force to wins some states in SS with the loopholes created by supreme court that non using of card readers do not invalidate an election no matter how violence it may be.

With this point of view, it can be said that it favours APC in the long run. APC can use this judgement to rig PDP out completely off Nigeria.

These judges messed up real bad.

adanny01:
I am not a lawyer but i think the supreme court erred in its decision.

Imagine it like this; my boss (FG) asked me (INEC) to distribute some cash to a list (voters register) of people (voters). In the past, i messed up everything as people claimed to be others and collected cash that belongs to someone else. Those who didnt get their share were furious on my boss and me. So i deviced a means (card reader) to identify the people in the true list and it was successful. I handled the list better than before but the impersonators reported to my boss's business partner (Supreme court) that my father and me decided to use a different means instead of just giving anybody who came. Now, my boss's businesses partner ordered me to give it to anybody even if his name is not verified to be on the list.

Isnt my boss's business colleague encouraging thieves.
How will his instruction help the purpose (free and fair elections) for which the money is being distributed?

INEC didnt go out of the law, it is just for supreme court to do the right thing by making the card reader law. Whatever the card reader is, it never surplanted the voters register but made it sacrosanct.

Its also like dismissing the case of a murderer caught in the act with all the evidence on a technicality that his rights were not read to him. How has justice been served and how will justice be served in future?

Unless the National assembly comes into this matter, election rigging has been legalised by the supreme court's action.

what of the case of apc vs pdp in Lagos? didn't we witnessed what happened in Rivers and other states?

Akainzo:



Sure, however you failed to recognise that for your name to be on that Voters Register, you need to have a Social Security Number!

For us in Nigeria, that Voters Card was the SSN. How do you decide that a Kehinde Taiwo is different from a Taiwo Kehinde when there is nothing to rely on other than a piece of paper?

The justices just took this nation backwards, they've truncated our March to a better society governed by truth and desirous of progress.

It is a sad day indeed.

It pains me that they could have made the card reader law by now but they refused so we can go back to the rigging days.

PDP that celebrates today my not find it easy in 2019 if APC capitalize on this. APC can block it at the NA and it is done with 2019.

doctokwus:
Selective use of the electoral act by the SCJ.
No where is law interpreted without taking reality into play.
No matter how some try to rationalize this,the supreme court has taken us back to 2007.
For those claiming the sc interpreted the law rightly, can anyone explain under which provision in the constitution the SC ruled that Peter Odili had perpetual injunction from being prosecuted?
Just as that of Odili was wrong, these election ruling in Rivers and Akwa Ibom are also wrong and no one shud justify the SC!

I think twas a Federal High Court headed by Justice Ibrahim Buba that issued that perpetual injunction on Odili, The Supreme Court can't stoop to that level

asuustrike2009:

what of the case of apc vs pdp in Lagos? didn't we witnessed what happened in Rivers and other states?

My worry is not for particular cases but for the case of card readers.

Una Wey Want Reason For Their Recent Decisions, Make Una Read The Epistle There.

adanny01:


With this point of view, it can be said that it favours APC in the long run. APC can use this judgement to rig PDP out completely off Nigeria.

These judges messed up real bad.

my man,that is it,this judgement brought joy for PDP presently,but in the longrun,it will be calamity because the judgement has taken us back to the era of do or die election and it only favours party ruling at federal.

babyfaceafrica:
Na lie

Go school you said no, now common simple English you no fit read until it's translated to Fulfide language. Kai may God help you.

adanny01:


My worry is not for particular cases but for the case of card readers.

Am sure they used that to deliver their judgement apart from the card reader palava. It will take the legislative arm to pass the bill after much deliberation which Attahiru Jega didn't do . what most persons don't know is that in every law there are loop holes and exceptions.So lawyers capitalise on those weak area to drive their points

I wonder why they didn't complain of Lagos saga at the supreme court even when their cases are similar. Those judges aren't dumb as to know what they are doing.

klassic:


My dear the best thing one can do at this Junction, is to posit that INEC forthwith, forwards a bill for An Act to Amend the provisions of Electoral Act (as amended), to incorporate and make provisions for the electronic card reader and let them start early enough by start working the configuration of same to avoid the problems of 2015.

of course yes, that would be a good move, else what bettercreature posted earlier will be the norm in future elections

The Supreme court has identified the lacuna in the laws edited.
Firstly, the National Assembly should as a matter of urgency withdraw the previous law that allows manual voting register and voting.

Replace it with a more robust permanent card register and make the voting machine its method of voting.

In this case the court relies solely in jurisprudence on the efficacy of the the permanent voters card as well recognise no other voting means except the the ones made by the voting machine.

doctokwus:
Selective use of the electoral act by the SCJ.
No where is law interpreted without taking reality into play.
No matter how some try to rationalize this,the supreme court has taken us back to 2007.
For those claiming the sc interpreted the law rightly, can anyone explain under which provision in the constitution the SC ruled that Peter Odili had perpetual injunction from being prosecuted?
Just as that of Odili was wrong, these election ruling in Rivers and Akwa Ibom are also wrong and no one shud justify the SC!

lol if u know wat u wroten.u would cover ur head in shame. by the way do u even know the meaning of pepetual injunction