Caleb17:
Supreme Court is the court of last resort.
When PDP was in power, that is how they dealt with the opposion without any reflection that there will be a humbling time like this. Life is turn by turn. It's now there turn.
Let them accept their fate.

If PDP had manipulated the Supreme Court in such manner during their reign in power, the likes of Peter Obi, Olusegun Mimiko, Rauf Aregbesola, Adams Oshomole etc wouldn't have been governor. They are all opposition candidates who became governor thru the instrumentality of the Supreme Court.

The only issue I have with this APC led government is their penchant for laying wrong precedence. Subsequent government will do worse, and justify their actions with what happened during Buhari's regime. With such actions, there is no hope in sight for Nigeria

I wonder how fo*lish most of you are. So because of your reasons the APC Can do worse? Has something like this ever happen before in the history of Nigeria?

Caleb17:
Supreme Court is the court of last resort.
When PDP was in power, that is how they dealt with the opposion without any reflection that there will be a humbling time like this. Life is turn by turn. It's now there turn.
Let them accept their fate.

God will not allow Tanko to have peace of mind even with all his money.

pseudaria:


If na curse I reject am in Jesus name, I must leave this shithole

Amen since you reject it

WATCHOVER:

Most of you need brain reset. I never read where he said Mary talkless of Odili. Abi na only Mary b Judge for Nigeria?.

Why did they single out CJN Tanko, when he didn't even head the supreme court panel that sat on the case?

Yusman316:

Why did they single out CJN Tanko, when he didn't even head the supreme court panel that sat on the case?

I honestly don't understand people's grouse with Tanko, when the decision was an unanimous decision of seven (7) supreme Court justices. So all the other supreme Court justices are exonerated?

zoedew:
Informed comments are better than uninformed ones. Those who read are ready. Read up on the judgment and ask a Lawyer or two where you are not clear on what you read and then you will be ready to comment on this thread!

Hope you were holding a mirror when you wrote that...
You would do well to INFORM yourself that only a decision was issued but the written judgment itself will follow later. SMH

Meanwhile, the Court has created the following UGLY precedents:
(1) ended up validating more votes than the number of registered/accredited voters;
(2) decided that all of the votes in 388 polling units were cast for only 1 candidate/party;
(3) ignored its own precedents that proof must be made for each individual polling unit; and
(4) replaced the findings of fact by the fact trier (the tribunal) without conducting a fact hearing.

For the avoidance of any doubt, I think of both of the PDP and the APC as merely two sides of the SAME criminal enterprise...
I also acknowledge the Supreme Court’s decision is final, but nonetheless let’s not deceive ourselves: the decision was GARBAGE!
>

pdp still dey sleep

9jaRealist:


Hope you were holding a mirror when you wrote that...
You would do well to INFORM yourself that only a decision was issued but the written judgment itself will follow later. SMH

Meanwhile, the Court has created the following UGLY precedents:
(1) ended up validating more votes than the number of registered/accredited voters;
(2) decided that all of the votes in 388 polling units were cast for only 1 candidate/party;
(3) ignored its own precedents that proof must be made for each individual polling unit; and
(4) replaced the findings of fact by the fact trier (the tribunal) without conducting a fact hearing.

For the avoidance of any doubt, I think of both of the PDP and the APC as merely two sides of the SAME criminal enterprise...
I also acknowledge the Supreme Court’s decision is final, but nonetheless let’s not deceive ourselves: the decision was GARBAGE!
>

good analysis

9jaRealist:


Hope you were holding a mirror when you wrote that...
You would do well to INFORM yourself that only a decision was issued but the written judgment itself will follow later. SMH

Meanwhile, the Court has created the following UGLY precedents:
(1) ended up validating more votes than the number of registered/accredited voters;
(2) decided that all of the votes in 388 polling units were cast for only 1 candidate/party;
(3) ignored its own precedents that proof must be made for each individual polling unit; and
(4) replaced the findings of fact by the fact trier (the tribunal) without conducting a fact hearing.

For the avoidance of any doubt, I think of both of the PDP and the APC as merely two sides of the SAME criminal enterprise...
I also acknowledge the Supreme Court’s decision is final, but nonetheless let’s not deceive ourselves: the decision was GARBAGE!
>

The truth you are obviously not comfortable with is that the Law about dumping documents on the court just changed. Until the Supreme Court reverses itself it stays that way! That only a decision was given is the more reason you should have refrained from an uninformed comment not having had the opportunity to read the Full judgment. Stay in shape Amigo!

9jaRealist:


Hope you were holding a mirror when you wrote that...
You would do well to INFORM yourself that only a decision was issued but the written judgment itself will follow later. SMH

Meanwhile, the Court has created the following UGLY precedents:
(1) ended up validating more votes than the number of registered/accredited voters;
(2) decided that all of the votes in 388 polling units were cast for only 1 candidate/party;
(3) ignored its own precedents that proof must be made for each individual polling unit; and
(4) replaced the findings of fact by the fact trier (the tribunal) without conducting a fact hearing.

For the avoidance of any doubt, I think of both of the PDP and the APC as merely two sides of the SAME criminal enterprise...
I also acknowledge the Supreme Court’s decision is final, but nonetheless let’s not deceive ourselves: the decision was GARBAGE!
>

Me, I no know book as I am not learned , but I can use my common sense.

Yes the verdict looks and sounds perverse, but are you arguing over an unanimous decision by all seven supreme Court judges? The highest legal minds in the land? To make matters worse, non of the 16 supreme Court justices has disagreed with the judgement, either from North east, West or south.

Don't you think there must be some merits in their judgements?

9jaRealist:


Hope you were holding a mirror when you wrote that...
You would do well to INFORM yourself that only a decision was issued but the written judgment itself will follow later. SMH

Meanwhile, the Court has created the following UGLY precedents:
(1) ended up validating more votes than the number of registered/accredited voters;
(2) decided that all of the votes in 388 polling units were cast for only 1 candidate/party;
(3) ignored its own precedents that proof must be made for each individual polling unit; and
(4) replaced the findings of fact by the fact trier (the tribunal) without conducting a fact hearing.

For the avoidance of any doubt, I think of both of the PDP and the APC as merely two sides of the SAME criminal enterprise...
I also acknowledge the Supreme Court’s decision is final, but nonetheless let’s not deceive ourselves: the decision was GARBAGE!
>

ON THE IMO STATE CASE, I FINALLY AGREED THAT THE SUPREME COURT GOT IT RIGHT!
For simple analogy, read this:

So that you crying lots can understand, I will break the judgment down for you in a layman way. Hope Uzodinma went to court, he told the court; I was rigged.

The court asked 'Can you prove your case', he answered, 'Yes', the court said 'Okay, Prove your case'.

Hope said no problem, he called 54 witnesses, he presented results of 388 polling units across the state where his votes were excluded. At the final INEC collation centres, INEC merely write 'Not Available' in the 388 columns where the votes of APC and Hope should be recorded, whereas, the column were filled and signed by all party agents, INEC and Police at the polling units.

Hope was smart, he gather the form EC8A his agents received at the 388 polling units where his votes were recorded and signed by all party agents, he also got form EC8B in all the 388 wards where his votes was unrecorded and was not therefore signed by his (APC) party agents. He presented all of that to the court and ask the court to explain why votes recorded at the PU went missing at the Ward, Local and State collation centres.

The Court said okay, we've heard you. They turn to the PDP and Ihedioha and asked him, did you hear what Hope said and see what he presented? Ihedioha said Yes. Court now asked him, do you agree with him?, he said No. Court then asked, what do you have to say.

Ihedioha called just 1 witness, he said what Hope presented and said was false. The Court said okay, but present the truth. Ihedioha said although I don't have any form or paper to present and I don't have more than 1 witness to call, but I know what Hope said is false. The court said Okay, hold on.

The court turned to INEC, did you hear what Hope said? They said Yes. Is it true? they said we don't know. The court asked if the form EC8A presented by Hope, where his votes were included and signed by all party agents and INEC was truly issued by INEC, INEC said Yes. They ask again, do you have any other contrary results or forms from the one Hope presented, INEC said No. The court said Okay. We are coming.

The court turned to the Police, who provided security for the election, do you hear what Hope said? Police said Yes, the court asked further, were you given the form EC8A at polling units level as provided for by the law? Police said Yes. Court ordered them to present it and they did, court cross-checked if it's the same with the one presented by Hope and alas it was.

Court then called Ihedioha, come and check it and juxtapose, he did, they asked if the form EC8A presented by INEC and the one presented by Hope which Ihedioha has just seen are the same, he said Yes. They asked him, what do you have to say? He insisted, it was forged

Court then told Ihedioha, you are a thief, Hope has proved his case and they declare hope the winner.

ME? I REST MY CASE.

wirinet:

Me, I no know book as I am not learned , but I can use my common sense.

Yes the verdict looks and sounds perverse, but are you arguing over an unanimous decision by all seven supreme Court judges? The highest legal minds in the land? To make matters worse, non of the 16 supreme Court justices has disagreed with the judgement, either from North east, West or south.

Don't you think there must be some merits in their judgements?

A unanimous decision given same day they heard the appeal simply means they were right,it was an easy case.if the decision was not unanimous like in osun,we can then find faults

garfield1:

A unanimous decision given same day they heard the appeal simply means they were right,it was an easy case.if the decision was not unanimous like in osun,we can then find faults

That's what I am saying, most presidential election judgements are usually split decisions, with one or two dissenting views, but to have an unanimous decision of seven judges from different tribes is extra ordinary. I believe hope Uzodinma and his lawyers must have done their homework well.
The courts are not about what is right or wrong, it's about what you can prove.

wirinet:

That's what I am saying, most presidential election judgements are usually split decisions, with one or two descending views, but to have an unanimous decision of seven judges from different tribes is extra ordinary. I believe hope Uzodinma and his lawyers must have done their homework well.
The courts are not about what is right or wrong, it's about what you can prove.

Yes sir.

zoedew:
The truth you are obviously not comfortable with is that the Law about dumping documents on the court just changed. Until the Supreme Court reverses itself it stays that way! That only a decision was given is the more reason you should have refrained from an uninformed comment not having had the opportunity to read the Full judgment. Stay in shape Amigo!

Dude, I was responding to your UN-INFORMED comment that we should go read the judgment that was not yet written. Stay safe!
>

garfield1:

ON THE IMO STATE CASE, I FINALLY AGREED THAT THE SUPREME COURT GOT IT RIGHT!
For simple analogy, read this:

So that you crying lots can understand, I will break the judgment down for you in a layman way. Hope Uzodinma went to court, he told the court; I was rigged.

The court asked 'Can you prove your case', he answered, 'Yes', the court said 'Okay, Prove your case'.

Hope said no problem, he called 54 witnesses, he presented results of 388 polling units across the state where his votes were excluded. At the final INEC collation centres, INEC merely write 'Not Available' in the 388 columns where the votes of APC and Hope should be recorded, whereas, the column were filled and signed by all party agents, INEC and Police at the polling units.

Hope was smart, he gather the form EC8A his agents received at the 388 polling units where his votes were recorded and signed by all party agents, he also got form EC8B in all the 388 wards where his votes was unrecorded and was not therefore signed by his (APC) party agents. He presented all of that to the court and ask the court to explain why votes recorded at the PU went missing at the Ward, Local and State collation centres.

The Court said okay, we've heard you. They turn to the PDP and Ihedioha and asked him, did you hear what Hope said and see what he presented? Ihedioha said Yes. Court now asked him, do you agree with him?, he said No. Court then asked, what do you have to say.

Ihedioha called just 1 witness, he said what Hope presented and said was false. The Court said okay, but present the truth. Ihedioha said although I don't have any form or paper to present and I don't have more than 1 witness to call, but I know what Hope said is false. The court said Okay, hold on.

The court turned to INEC, did you hear what Hope said? They said Yes. Is it true? they said we don't know. The court asked if the form EC8A presented by Hope, where his votes were included and signed by all party agents and INEC was truly issued by INEC, INEC said Yes. They ask again, do you have any other contrary results or forms from the one Hope presented, INEC said No. The court said Okay. We are coming.

The court turned to the Police, who provided security for the election, do you hear what Hope said? Police said Yes, the court asked further, were you given the form EC8A at polling units level as provided for by the law? Police said Yes. Court ordered them to present it and they did, court cross-checked if it's the same with the one presented by Hope and alas it was.

Court then called Ihedioha, come and check it and juxtapose, he did, they asked if the form EC8A presented by INEC and the one presented by Hope which Ihedioha has just seen are the same, he said Yes. They asked him, what do you have to say? He insisted, it was forged

Court then told Ihedioha, you are a thief, Hope has proved his case and they declare hope the winner.

ME? I REST MY CASE.

Bro, problem with your dissertation is the finder of fact (the Election Tribunal) heard all of these and still rejected Uzodimma's petition.

The Supreme Court (like the Appeal Court) is NOT a finder of fact, unless it opts to review a case de novo, in which case it holds an evidentiary hearing. The reason that an appellate court defers to the finding of fact of the trial court (the tribunal in this instance) is that the tribunal has the benefit of directly appraising witnesses and determining the credibility or veracity (or otherwise) of their evidence. Accordingly, the ONLY way that an appellate court (including the Supreme Court) can overrule the findings of FACT of the trier of fact is to hold its own evidentiary hearing, which the Tanko court did not conduct. That's Jurisprudence 101 (let's not even get into the absurdity of ending up with MORE votes than accredited voters).

Anyway, as previously said, I consider both PDP and APC are merely two sides of the SAME criminal enterprise...
I also reaffirm my recognition that the verdict of the Supreme Court is final, but that does not change that it's GARBAGE!
>

wirinet:
Me, I no know book as I am not learned, but I can use my common sense.

Yes the verdict looks and sounds perverse, but are you arguing over an unanimous decision by all seven supreme Court judges? The highest legal minds in the land? To make matters worse, non of the 16 supreme Court justices has disagreed with the judgement, either from North east, West or south.

Don't you think there must be some merits in their judgements?

That's not how the Supreme Court works...
The 16 Justices do not issue personal opinions on matters before the Court.

Meanwhile, it is IRRELEVANT which part of the country a Justice comes from...
Unfortunately, we are increasingly politicizing our judiciary and judicializing our politics.

I respect the Supreme Court's decision as binding...
But (pending the written judgment that changes my mind) I think it's GARBAGE!
>

9jaRealist:




Bro, problem with your dissertation is the finder of fact (the Election Tribunal) heard all of these and still rejected Uzodimma's petition.

The Supreme Court (like the Appeal Court) is NOT a finder of fact, unless it opts to review a case de novo, in which case it holds an evidentiary hearing. The reason that an appellate court defers to the finding of fact of the trial court (the tribunal in this instance) is that the tribunal has the benefit of directly appraising witnesses and determining the credibility or veracity (or otherwise) of their evidence. Accordingly, the ONLY way that an appellate court (including the Supreme Court) can overrule the findings of FACT of the trier of fact is to hold its own evidentiary hearing, which the Tanko court did not conduct. That's Jurisprudence 101 (let's not even get into the absurdity of ending up with MORE votes than accredited voters).

Anyway, as previously said, I consider both PDP and APC are merely two sides of the SAME criminal enterprise...
I also reaffirm my recognition that the verdict of the Supreme Court is final, but that does not change that it's GARBAGE!
>

it seems you are legally grounded but you missed a lot of points.see,i use to think that the supreme court decisions on both wike and akwa ibom in 2015 was garbage until i had to go back to their judgments right from 1983 to see that they have been neutral and consistent.
Right from when supreme court started handling guber cases in 2014,they almost always upturn tribunal judges that nullify elections not because of the findings of the trial court but because of illegalities in the findings or not following the constitution strictly in arriving at the end result.
In essence,the tribunal may have correctly found something wrong with hope's result but there's no legal basis for dismissing those results.moreovrr,the reason the court gave were flimsy and shaky.
You just like the tribunal forgot that results declared at the polling units cannot be cancelled except by a law court.it is an age long settled law,it didnt start today.ihedioha should have cross Appeal to get those results canceled instead he was focusing on destroying nwosu inorder to remove the 2/3 debacle.inec based its decision to exclude those results on over voting,it sees overvoting based on the card reader data while the law says over voting can be calculated using voters register.
. mind you,the tribunal in dismissing hope case said he didnt call witnesses from all polling units.in the state not just the 388 units ,didnt call the makers of those documents and that the police dcp testified on his own.this was wrong,this standard of proof and formula only applies to those challenging elections based on non compliance or electoral malpractice.hope case was purely on wrongful exclusion of results and the standard of proof are different and much more easier and doesn't require witnesses from all unit in the 338 units talkless of the state.
The dcp of police was properly subpoenaed therefore him tsztifying on his own is null.several inec staffs testified in hope's favor.he discharged the burden of proof which shifted to inec which failed to rebute it.the supreme court summarised it by saying the lower courts misunderstood the case and i totally agree.your statement that the supreme court should have held an evidentiary hearing is incorrect and misguided afterall its not an inquisitory panel and the legal timeline is against that.once the decision of a trial court is perverse,not based on sound law and absurd,the apex court needs no much ado than to overrule them which happened in this case.

Based on the above,they had no other option than to declare hope winner after adding his excluded votes.the judgment is legally correct but morally or socially faulted.even you could not fault the judgment on any sound law.please see ajasin vs omoboriowo 1983 per jsc sowemimo

Hillsong34:
Iheadioha's administration focused too much on the past governor Rochas Okorocha. In August 2019, a report surfaced that he issued an order for the arrest and prosecution of Okorocha. This was greeted with widespread uproar that the new governor should tread softly.
The Ohaneze described the move as an invitation to anarchy which is capable plunging the state into chaos.

The Imo PDP also did not help matters. Rather than focus on governance, they kept too much energy on the previous administration of Okorocha and also alleged that the ex-governor left the state with a liability of N300billion.

Several attempts were made by elders in the state to resolve the face-off between the two political figures, but all failed woefully.

How does focusing on Rochas Okorocha constitute to a problem. It is all about accountability which is also within his power. He will expect to be scrutinised as well when he is out.

The begging question is the judicial coup in Imo State? That's still difficult to understand !