chukel:
the bolded shows you are a robot not capable of reasoning. Repeating the same thing. Imagine the nonsense coming from you [/b]YOU DON’T REMOVE AN INCUMBENT BY PRESENTING CLEARLY FRAUDULENT DOCUMENTS NO MATTER HOW THE INCUMBENT WAS ELECTED![/b]. Well deal with it. Hope is now the incumbent. So apply that your useless statement.

HacheNoire:


You watch too much Nollywood movies.

Judgement is irreversible as it stands today.

Basher8583:


Stop ruminating on the 4th place. We all know he didn't come 4th in the election. That was the reason for the election dispute in the first place now. PDP rigged so badly that they couldnt perfect it well hence to loop hole that got them busted.
Please go and rest. The pain of loss will take time to heal but it will eventually go. At least you survived Atiku is cumming drama. You will also survive this one. Pele

CanadaOrBust:


Why do u refuse to be teachable??
I’ve told u b4, Hope is not the incumbent in that sense. Hope is the FOURTH place finisher. That’s the base line.

A COURT used him to replace the incumbent. Lawyers will cite that case ad infinitum, unless SC reverses itself.

Ihedioha was not installed by a court - no stare decisis, no case law to be cited.

Is that simple enough or is it still too complicated 4 u?

CanadaOrBust:


Why do so many people on this forum refuse to be educated?!

In all elections there are errors and shenanigans and most people try to “rig” to some extent. That’s why a premium is placed on whatever is declared as the result after all that. And that’s why the bar for removing an incumbent is placed high.

AFTER ALL THAT, the electoral authority declared Ihedioha the winner and Hope the 4th place finisher.

After all the games and maneuverings, Hope finished FOURTH. That’s the baseline and u don’t lightly change that, u don’t change that through some ridiculous documents!

chukel:
are you this stupid? Is hope not the incumbent governor now? Are you daft? So supreme court should apply your principle which says you don't remove an incumbent with fraudulent document no matter how he was elected. In that sense, they should throw away both ihedioha and whatever he is bringing to them for review. I bu ezigbote aturu.
Please don't quote me again. You are completely daft. In fact you are a robot. You are under instruction to ruminate same sentences.

Basher8583:


Denial is part of the characteristics of delusion comming as a result of pain of loss. Dont worry you will soon be ok. It will just take some time

Pele

CanadaOrBust:


See how u r educating yourself. @bolded, note the word “elected”, WAS HOPE ELECTED??

Now run along

CanadaOrBust:


I didn’t lose anything at all. I am neither Ibo nor do I care one whit about Ihedioha or PDP.
I do care about our nation’s trajectory and about my right to choose my leaders being taken away

chukel:
idiot. Stop quoting me. By the inclusion of the excluded votes from the 388 polling units, was he not elected by the majority. Is it because fraudsters like you manipulated the system and shut him out by excluding votes from his stronghold but padded votes from mbaise, making it look like he was 4th place?

tokrizy:
If u re around uniben and u need to buy a foam and a generator. Please quote me. I want to sell..I will show d pictures and everything at affordable price

CanadaOrBust:
Politicians and lies!
IMMEDIATELY Omoboriowo was declared winner by FEDECO there was pandemonium on the streets, the worst riots in Yoruba history. At least 40 people were killed, with two law makers set ablaze. That’s what he is comparing to Ihedioha where Imolites were rejoicing en masse. Also in that case SC UPHELD the rulings of all the lower courts, not overturn them on the technicality of refusing to examine documents right in front of them!

Mr. Oshiomhole is also being dishonest. In those other cases the SC simply upheld what everybody already knew. Example, everyone knew APC held no primary in Zamfara. He knows fully well this case is quite different.

Never in Nigerian judicial history (or any authentic democracy for that matter) has the SC ruled against ALL lower courts AND the election authority itself in order to immediately replace a sitting governor with a 4th-place finisher - all based on clearly questionable, uncollaborated, and unauthenticated documents supplied solely by the 4th-place finisher himself!!

All elections have errors. That’s why you have to keep the bar for removing an incumbent high. Otherwise anyone can come up with electoral errors or connive with INEC or cook up something (as in this case), and no elected official would be safe. To replace an 8-month incumbent gov with a 4th-place finishing appellant needs to be just about impossible. It needs to be backed by documentary and other evidence, totally above board, beyond reproach, and with multiple layers of authentication. Not some childish incomplete documents like Uzodinma’s, full of 100+% voter turnouts, smudges and alterations, and with only two parties’ results showing!
YOU DON’T DECIDE SUCH A CASE BASED ON SUCH DOCUMENTS, OR TECHNICALITIES OR BY NOT EXAMINING DOCUMENTS, OR BY PRETENDING NOT TO SEE WHAT IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU!

I’d only say the following to those supporting this horrible judgment:

Realize that what u r supporting is removal of your right to choose your leaders, no less. Which will inevitably lead to a one-party state.
To be clear, here is the precedent u r supporting:

A person that comes 10th can easily be declared winner and immediately sworn in. All they’d have to do is present result sheets which the Supreme Court MUST accept no matter how outrageous and defective they may be, as long as no one can produce the originals!
That’s what u r supporting!

The SC has a duty to make sure that such a momentous, unprecedented decision has solid, unassailable documentary basis?! They start doing that by thoroughly examining the documents in front of them! SC does not exist in a vacuum. This is also their country and they ought care they are setting a precedent that can gradually make the country a one-party state. Here they are, removing a gov and replacing him with a fourth-place finishing appellant based solely on a set of uncollaborated documents supplied solely by the appellant himself. Regardless of what anyone else submits or fails to submit, they have a DUTY to EXAMINE those documents to make sure they are up to par and that the figures therein make sense vis-a-vis number of registered and accredited voters! That is how it is done! And that is why you’ve never had a judgment like this before!

tokrizy:
If u re around uniben and u need to buy a foam and a generator. Please quote me. I want to sell..I will show d pictures and everything at affordable price

GenBuhari:
If I understand clearly, the governor seems to be implying that when INEC excluded his votes, they deducted those votes from th e total number of accredited voters .
The corruption within INEC knows no bounds .

CanadaOrBust:


Not at all. His votes and voter turnouts were more than even REGISTERED voters (see below).
And don’t be fooled, INEC is always controlled by the ruling party, who makes all their appointments.

(Also I’m not sure if u r aware PDP won the rerun recently held in the same Hope’s “stronghold” where he got 99.9% of the votes with 100+% voter turnouts!)

“The Guardian obtained a certified-true-copy of the record of the appeal filed at the Supreme Court by Uzodinma and APC...

For instance, on figure number 69 which shows votes cast at Eziama/Okpala (Umualum Village Square, Eziama), the total number of registered voters was 492, whereas the table shows that the APC scored 819 votes and PDP scored 7 votes, meaning that 334 more votes than the registered voters were recorded, apart from the votes polled by the other candidates at the election that were not shown on the table.

Similarly, on page 22 of the petition referencing polling unit 282, the number of registered voters was put at 591, whereas the tabulation shows that APC polled 586 votes and PDP nine votes, indicating a total of four votes higher than the registered number of voters. This, again, excluded the votes scored by the other candidates.

On the same page 22 of the record, at the polling unit 285 (Obudi/Aro, Central Assembly Square, Unusable 11) with 449 registered voters, APC was credited with 780 votes and PDP with four votes, leaving a total of 335 votes higher than the actual number of registered voters.

Figures obtained from page 79 of the record of appeal under item 384 show that APC scored 526 votes, while PDP was credited with two votes, and the total votes cast was put at 526, indicating two votes higher than the total number registered voters in the area.”

GenBuhari:
Clearly the court had seen enough to not trust any figure presented by INEC. INEC could easily have manipulated all figures including number of registered voters to justify their illegal exclusion of votes in APC strongholds .

Sweetcollins:


What size is d foam

Alexis105:
. I want to buy d generator

Tareq1105:
Ever since the Supreme Court gave the judgement, PDP is yet to answer the question whether or not Ihedioha scored 25% in 2/3 of the local government in the state.

To me, the answer seems to be NO.

This is because P apa D eceiving P ikin is only protesting all over even to US and UK embassies leaving an all important question unanswered.

Yoruba would say " ejo laa koko ko ki a to ko ija" meaning you must learn to explain yourself convincingly before you learn how to fight. Because after fight, both parties will still be asked to explain what led to the fight.

Honestly, PDP is a disgrace because one would expect its legal adviser to advise members appropriately.

Seeking public sympathy will not help to win a case. Going to embassies is making a full of yourself.

How would these embassies help the evidence on the table?

Even God tells us in the Bible to 'produce your strong reasons'

CanadaOrBust:


No, INEC didn’t present anything (no doubt in cohorts with APC)
SC did not examine Hope’s documents AT ALL. They accepted his figures and tabulations without examination or interrogation. They knew quite well that would mean laughing him out of court.

U don’t remove an incumbent based on such, no matter how he was elected.

In all elections there are errors and shenanigans and most people try to “rig” to some extent. That’s why a premium is placed on whatever is declared as the result after all that. And that’s why the bar for removing an incumbent is high.

After all the games and maneuverings, Ihedioha was declared the winner, and Hope finished FOURTH. That’s the baseline and u don’t lightly change that, u don’t change that through some highly questionable childish documents!

NGpatriot:




With this assertion, Ihedioha too was also in cohorts with INEC and the APC to swing the decision for Hope since they failed to rightfully demand that INEC produce the original results and election documents instead of sitting in court like mumu and just going along aimlessly, also for not producing their own valid results to cross-examine with Hope's presented results.

You can not blame INEC for doing what Ihedioha himself refused to do because INEC and Ihedioha were in the same courtroom where Hope presented his results and election documents and they both had the opportunity to examine the documents and to also present their own documents for proper examination and cross-examination.

Since INEC and Ihedioha did not present their own sets of facts and refused to properly challenge, counter and cross-examine Hope's document's Ihedioha too was obviously in cohorts with INEC and APC.

Your reasoning just didn't make any sense.

CanadaOrBust:


INEC either did not have or REFUSED to present them just as the SC REFUSED to examine Hope’s documents, knowing fully well he’d be laughed out of court if they did.

Also, u talk as if the parties are equal. They are not.
Ihedioha was the INCUMBENT!
He was not going to court to have himself replace the incumbent based on some clearly questionable, childish documents.
All elections have errors and shenanigans. That‘s why the bar for removing an incumbent is high. Otherwise anybody can come up with electoral errors or connive with INEC or cook up something any time.

After all the games and maneuverings, the electoral umpire declared Ihedioha the winner and Hope FOURTH place. That’s the baseline. You don’t lightly change that. You don’t change that by refusing to examine documents.
YOU DON’T REMOVE AN INCUMBENT BY PRESENTING CLEARLY FRAUDULENT DOCUMENTS NO MATTER HOW THE INCUMBENT WAS ELECTED!

We know the way many of our senators and reps “won”. But u need solid, unassailable evidence to have them removed. Not some childish, incomplete documents full of ridiculous figures and smudges and alterations, signed by only APC, and with only APC and PDP results showing!

INEC did not counter APC’s claim with any evidence, witness

The full judgment substantiates the claim that PDP called only one witness while INEC neither called a witness nor tendered any documents to challenge the appeal.

In another section of the judgment, Justice Kekere-Ekun state that INEC “failed woefully to tender the results it termed ‘genuine’, which would have rebutted the presumption of regularity in favour of the documents” tendered by the APC.


Asked why the commission did not adduce evidence to puncture the APC’s claims about excluded votes, Oyekanmi did not provide an answer.

https://www.icirnigeria.org/imo-election-noteworthy-points-from-supreme-courts-full-judgment/

NGpatriot:


1. INEC did not produce any evidence or their own results and election documents, they did not even produce any witness.

2. If the documents produce by Hope was childish an fradulent, who's job was it to produce credible and authentic documents? INEC and Ihedioha, but did they produce anything? No.

3. The results produced by Hope were the duplicates of the original given to the Nigerian police as dictated by the Nigerian electoral laws and INEC and Ihedioha were in the courtroom to challenge the documents with their own, but they couldn't.

Instead of sitting on NL doing your lawyering with just your own irrelevant opinion that doesn't reflect what actually transpired inside the courtroom, at least source and read news reports based on what actually happened in the courtroom.

CanadaOrBust:


You apparently didn’t read anything I wrote. You are telling me what the SC did. I am telling you the SC was WRONG/COMPROMISED! The lower courts were right!

Never in Nigerian judicial history (or any authentic democracy for that matter) has the SC ruled against ALL lower courts AND the election authority itself in order to immediately replace a sitting governor with a 4th-place finisher - all based on clearly questionable, uncollaborated, and unauthenticated documents supplied solely by the 4th-place finisher himself!!

To replace an 8-month incumbent gov with a 4th-place appellant needs to be just about impossible. It needs to be backed by documentary and other evidence, totally above board, beyond reproach, and with multiple layers of authentication. Not some childish incomplete documents like Uzodinma’s, full of 100+% voter turnouts, smudges and alterations, and with only two parties’ results showing!
YOU DON’T DECIDE SUCH A CASE BASED ON SUCH DOCUMENTS, OR TECHNICALITIES OR BY NOT EXAMINING DOCUMENTS, OR BY PRETENDING NOT TO SEE WHAT IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU!

Supreme Court cases set precedents that lawyers will cite ad infinitum.
Here’s the precedent set here:

A person that comes 10th can easily be declared winner and immediately replace the incumbent. All they’d have to do is present result sheets which the Supreme Court MUST accept no matter how outrageous and defective they may be, as long as no one can produce the originals!
That’s what u r supporting!

See, this is not just another case. This is a case that strikes at the very core of what type of country we’d end up becoming. The SC has a duty to make sure that such a momentous, unprecedented decision has solid, unassailable documentary basis?! They start doing that by thoroughly examining the documents in front of them! SC does not exist in a vacuum. This is also their country and they ought care they are setting a precedent that can gradually make the country a one-party state. Here they are, removing a gov and replacing him with a fourth-place finishing appellant based solely on a set of uncollaborated documents supplied solely by the appellant himself. Regardless of what anyone else submits or fails to submit, they have a DUTY to EXAMINE those documents they are basing everything on to make sure they are up to par and that the figures therein make sense vis-a-vis number of registered and accredited voters! That is how it is done! And that is why you’ve never had a judgment like this before!

NGpatriot:
[s][/s]



I read what you posted and I specifically bolded and quoted what you posted.

You said INEC produced evidence and witness, but the SC did not entertain the evidence that INEC produced which was a lie and i provided proof to show you that INEC did not produce any witness or evidence.

Even your lower court argument is a reflection of your own confusion and misguided understanding of the case the litigants and the SC debated.

The case was about INEC nullification of election results, not about issues debated by the lower courts, even by law, the SC can not debate lower court issues.

Again, go and read up on the case and what transpired at the SC instead of making ignorant comments and recycling lame opinion.

CanadaOrBust:


Are u ok??
I have no patience for people who can’t read/comprehend.
Below is what I wrote. Where does it say INEC produced anything?

The case is about replacing an 8-month incumbent governor with an appellant who finished FOURTH!

Now run along

HacheNoire:


You watch too much Nollywood movies.

Judgement is irreversible as it stands today.