Welcome, Guest: Register On Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / NewStats: 3,194,368 members, 7,954,493 topics. Date: Friday, 20 September 2024 at 08:23 PM |
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Politics / Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 (34499 Views)
Tinubu: Court Adjourns Hearing On Peter Obi’s Petition Till Wednesday / Rochas Okorocha Celebrates The Sack Of Ihedioha By Supreme Court. Sings, Claps / Imo Youths Petition CJN Over Declaration Of Ihedioha As Governor-elect (2) (3) (4)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (Reply) (Go Down)
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by rolams(m): 11:29am On Feb 18, 2020 |
Some people here only read and comment nonsense. No judge will ruin his/her career/reputation carelessly. How will the judges proof to the world the 100,000+ votes that exceed the total accredited voters? How will they proof to the world the 400+ votes exceeding the total registered voters in some polling units? Remember the numbers of seats the APC won at the general election too |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by Clevite(m): 11:29am On Feb 18, 2020 |
CanadaOrBust:Yes, everybody is watching; including the international communities like the UN, the EU, the AU, the ECOWAS, the UK, the US' Donald Trump and Congressmen! Above all, it's being watched by a politically 'non-partisan' person like you. |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by unitysheart(m): 11:29am On Feb 18, 2020 |
RagaMufeen: You people's problem is that you don't read body of a news. You only read the title. |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by Agboriotejoye(m): 11:29am On Feb 18, 2020 |
kcmichael:And how can the SC grant him? Just wait and see. 1 Like 1 Share |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by Austineva(m): 11:32am On Feb 18, 2020 |
Akpa gi puo n'uzo ka akpa onye ozo obughi akpasia gi I kwechiri n'esi so onwu. Akpago ihedioha finally |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by Clevite(m): 11:34am On Feb 18, 2020 |
[quote author=andrezie post=86750696]How is it your problem? Not mine, jare. It's obviously their problem. |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by Eteka1(m): 11:34am On Feb 18, 2020 |
Agboriotejoye:"statute barred. Action, agreement, claim, obligation, or right that can no longer be the subject of a legal action because the time limit imposed by the limitations act (see statute of limitations) has been exceeded". This review is a legal action. 1 Like |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by Agboriotejoye(m): 11:35am On Feb 18, 2020 |
Dansuqi: What is the meaning of this? Do you realize the SC will have to determine if the constitutional spread is met? Do you know what is meant by it being a constitutional matter? 2 Likes 1 Share |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by Dansuqi: 11:35am On Feb 18, 2020 |
CanadaOrBust:Guy,rest na |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by Dansuqi: 11:36am On Feb 18, 2020 |
Agboriotejoye:Guy,they will need to call experts in maths to calculate that spread going by what happened at the tribunal |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by Dansuqi: 11:37am On Feb 18, 2020 |
Agboriotejoye:The supreme court had no choice but to adjourn as requested,it makes it easier forvthem |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by SoNature(m): 11:37am On Feb 18, 2020 |
fergie001: I hear they are crying that they are overwhelmed with work. I just don't understand why they have to wait for Buhari to approve the appointment of more justices. A Nigerian president is annoyingly very powerful https://m.guardian.ng/news/ignore-order-to-appoint-more-supreme-court-justices-group-warns-cjn/ |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by Dansuqi: 11:41am On Feb 18, 2020 |
Lostz:This is electoral maths.going by our politics,whenever a two third calculation is indivisible,they approximate higher not lower.examples are in our stats houses of assemblies when impeachment matters arise |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by fergie001: 11:41am On Feb 18, 2020 |
SoNature:That's it.... Since October 2019, four names have been sent to him for approval and he has simply ignored. |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by fergie001: 11:42am On Feb 18, 2020 |
Dansuqi:Like 12⅔? |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by seniormallam(m): 11:42am On Feb 18, 2020 |
Ebenezar2020:I don't think my own God will leave the cure for Lassa fever and Coronavirus and be interested in the useless Nigeria politics .......it's even an insult for them to be saying God reveal the winner of court case to them. 5 Likes 1 Share |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by Agboriotejoye(m): 11:43am On Feb 18, 2020 |
Eteka1: It is not a legal action per se. Its a review of a previously concluded legal action especially on a constitutional issue. Don't be surprised that the issue of the 388 PU results will not be the main thing but the constitutional spread. Like I said, this is why having Kanu Agabi is a masterstroke by PDP. He is a respected lawyer and cannot be bamboozled into any cul-de-sac moreso he knows his onions. |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by Agboriotejoye(m): 11:48am On Feb 18, 2020 |
Dansuqi: They have a choice especially on a matter like review which is considered an affront to the SC normally. Even Ozekhome said he can never ask SC for a review not to talk of going to ask for an adjournment when the panel has decided to hear your review. |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by adelaja70(m): 11:49am On Feb 18, 2020 |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by COMPLEXCHIZZY(m): 11:51am On Feb 18, 2020 |
NIGER
|
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by Nobody: 11:51am On Feb 18, 2020 |
Dansuqi:you get .3 in house of assembly? are there half humans there? |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by Nobody: 11:57am On Feb 18, 2020 |
Dansuqi: Under the 1979 Nigerian Constitution, in order to be elected President on the first ballot a candidate needed to receive both the most votes nationwide and at least 25% of the vote in two-thirds of the states. However, at the time of the election, Nigeria had nineteen states, two-thirds of which in exact figures is 12.66. A dispute thus ensued over whether Shehu Shagari had received the necessary threshold by winning 25% in twelve states and 19.9% in Kano State, which Shagari claimed was two-thirds of the required 25% threshold and represented the remaining 0.66 in the constitutional threshold. Obafemi Awolowo claimed that the threshold should be rounded up to thirteen states, which Shagari had not met. The Supreme Court of Nigeria ruled in favour of Shagari. |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by tempest01(m): 11:58am On Feb 18, 2020 |
Dansuqi: They accepted it, and resolved the case to Hope? |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by Yebosola(m): 11:58am On Feb 18, 2020 |
emeijeh: ,if I talk now my brothers from the East will be shouting Afonja up & down .Is Hope from Southwest or Northern Region? Oh Hope is from the Zoo |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by Abagworo(m): 12:01pm On Feb 18, 2020 |
CanadaOrBust: Are you from Imo? Koro puo ebea biko. Ihedioha deserves to spend the rest of his cursed life in jail for electoral malpractice alongside his INEC accomplices. |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by CanadaOrBust: 12:01pm On Feb 18, 2020 |
Psoul: Ok, mention another case like this in recent SC memory. Mention another case where SC relied on clearly fraudulent documents to overrule all lower courts plus INEC in order to replace an 8-month gov with a 4th place finisher. You can’t. That’s why there is still some modicum of respect for the SC. Below is an article from YESTERDAY’S paper. It typifies the attitude of most non-partisan, non-political Nigerians like me. Note the bolded. ————————————————————— That Supreme Court Magic Judgment This Day (Lagos) 17 FEBRUARY 2020 ... According to summary of trial materials, no ward collation agent was called to show that at the collation center results were brought from the 388 polling units where the alleged exclusion took place... The petitioner, rather called 28 polling unit agents who came to identify some of the results tendered by the petitioner from the bar. All the electoral documents were tendered from the bar and thus dumped on the court without anybody giving evidence correlating the contents of the result forms with the tabulation done by the petitioner himself. Each of the 18 polling unit agents under cross-examination, manifested ignorance of the contents of the documents and never convinced anybody of being present in their claimed polling units... When confronted with the purported result sheets tendered by the petitioners, each of the witnesses admitted as follows: i. The names and signatures of the Presiding Officers are not well found on those results. ii. The names and signatures of other party agents did not appear on the result sheets, neither could they mention even one party agent of the other political parties in those booths. iii. The result sheets do not contain the total number of ballot papers used and number of ballot papers unused or invalid. The scores of political parties are not clear on the face of the documents. Based on the above, it appears the Supreme Court was desperately working to an answer in favour of the ruling party... and the only opening to do that was to accept the fictitious results of the 388 polling units willy-nilly. And instead of doing substantial justice on the matter, it ended up delivering one of judiciary's greatest infamies which even a kid learning arithmetic can see through. The judgment turned logic on its head, rewrote the basic universal laws of arithmetic and did grave and substantial injury to our democracy and the power of the people to choose who governs them. With this judicial precedent, the Supreme Court has inevitably rubber-stamped political rascality and the judgment could shape our democratic future. The court has widened the opening which politicians exploit and manipulate to get into elective offices. All one needs to do is to stay somewhere, maybe in one's room, probably with one policeman or so, write one's own results, submit to INEC for counting and if it refuses, don't worry, bid your time till you get to the court. With supreme arrogance, the final court of appeal will recognise the results as legitimate, credible and authentic and pronto, you will be declared duly elected. ...Even more perplexing was the fact that in some of the polling units, voter turnout was more than the registered voters. How is this possible? In Uzodinma's result sheets, there was no voided vote and only two parties, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and APC participated and were reflected in the election results of the 388 polling units. Yet, 70 political parties participated in that election and were all reflected in the INEC declared results of other polling units all over the state. ..,Does it mean that other parties such as All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), Action Alliance (AA), etc., did not participate in the election in those 388 polling units contrary to INEC's results in other areas of the state? Why did the result sheets reflect only two parties when so many parties participated in the said election? Apparently, Senator Uzodinma concocted those results that fly in the face of the basic laws of arithmetic and common sense between the PDP and the APC after the fact that the PDP had won the election and he only scored his party a vote figure higher than the PDP vote. The corollary to that is that if it was any other party that was on the cusp of victory, Uzodinma's results would have been between just the APC and that party! Yet our almighty Supreme Court glossed over all these fundamental anomalies in Uzodinma's result sheets which had been rejected by even INEC... and accepted same as authentic. A further assessment of the result sheets of the disputed 388 polling units showed that the said units are all in the Orlu Senatorial Zone where Uzodinma and the candidate of the Action Alliance Ugwumba Uche Nwosu come from. So even if the 388 polling units were concentrated mostly in Uzodinma's ancestral home, surely, Nwosu who emerged second in the March 9, 2019 election in Imo State and was backed by the incumbent governor at the time, Rochas Okorocha, his father in-law, must have amassed some votes from the units. But these votes were curiously missing, for the simple reason that they forged the results, and very badly at that. Furthermore, Uzodinma of the APC scored an average of 98% of the total votes cast in the 388 units, whereas he scored an average of 13% in the remaining polling units in the state. How could this be? Why was it that it was only in these 388 units throughout the state that the voter turnout was either more than the registered voters or achieved 98 to 100 percent of the registered voters? Please note that emphasis is NOT on the number of accredited voters which is usually far less than the number of registered voters. Uzodinma's fake results validated by our Supreme Court defy reason. The pattern of the results from the disputed 388 polling units clearly shows the improbability of such an occurrence. And on the basis of the testimony of one policeman, and 28 discredited polling units' agents who gave contradictory statements at trial, the Supreme Court accepted the results. In declaring Uzodinma governor of Imo State, the Supreme Court simply annulled a valid mandate freely given to an individual and transferred it to another person who came fourth in the election. Dansuqi, Clevite, Abagworo, Dididrumz |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by NORSYK(m): 12:06pm On Feb 18, 2020 |
DTaj: What a brainless fellow. So, Agabi a former attorney General of the federation is an unserious and unprepared lawyer because he asked for more time to respond to a defence that was filed yesterday and served to him in the courtroom this morning? |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by executive12: 12:09pm On Feb 18, 2020 |
Good. That biased quota system Sharia Judge should step aside from the case. All the other compromised Judges that decided on the case should step aside. That is the way it should be. Buhari and Tanko Mohammed have destroyed people's confidence in the Supreme Court. It's very unfortunate. |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by executive12: 12:10pm On Feb 18, 2020 |
RagaMufeen: He will step aside. That is why the PDP asked for adjournment, so they can file their request. 1 Like |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by kahal29: 12:15pm On Feb 18, 2020 |
Dansuqi: What people don't understand is that the supreme court cannot relitigate or retry this Imo case again which includes determining the question of whether Hope met the required spread or not. The reason is because 1. The Supreme court is not a trial court 2. Time for trial and calling of expert witnesses who will answer the mathematical question of spread has elapsed even it wants to determine the question of the spread. 3. Ihedioha and his team had all the opportunity in the world to scrutinize and discountenance Hope Uzodinma result and even go a step further to show that even with his so-called result that he cannot be declared a governor based on his inability to meet the required spread but they didn't do that but was waiting for the courts to descend on the arena to do their job for them. 4. Besides the question of whether Hope Uzodinma met the required spread or not was never an issue at the trial stage and even at the point the supreme court delivered its judgenment so could not rule on it, So, determining the constitutional issue of spread at this stage would involve calling witnesses from both sides which means re-litigating and retrying the matter again. 1 Like |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by Indispensable85(m): 12:15pm On Feb 18, 2020 |
So these ones are not even ready. |
Re: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Ihedioha’s Case To March 2, 2020 by femolii: 12:15pm On Feb 18, 2020 |
Ihedioha is not serious he should just forget and move on. he have to support uzo and move the state forward. |
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (Reply)
FG Orders Banks To Open From Monday / Man Goes Off On A Rant After Discovering That Son Of New CJN Is An Obidient / Court Of Appeal Allows National Assembly To Re-order 2019 Election Sequence
(Go Up)
Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 87 |