fergie001:

Hahahahahahaha................. Until I read the full judgement of the FHC, I won't comment.

I have never commented on Imo or on Zamfara for once.

Wole again said that psp asked for ten reliefs and inyang ekwo granted 6 none of which consequentially affected lyon

Dansuqi:

Wole again said that psp asked for ten reliefs and inyang ekwo granted 6 none of which consequentially affected lyon

Ok....
He is trying to differentiate between six and half a dozen.....but small details here can also help him.

Do you have the full judgement?let me work it out this night;I have a publication to give my Oga but I can spare time.

fergie001:

Ok....
He is trying to differentiate between six and half a dozen.....but small details here can also help him.

Do you have the full judgement?let me work it out this night;I have a publication to give my Oga but I can spare time.

I dont and am very busy to start searching for it now.what he is doing may look or seem funny or irrelevant but he knows what he is doing.he refused to talk about whether degi and his affidavits but attacked the way the apex court interpreted inyang ekwo's judgment

Dansuqi:

I dont and am very busy to start searching for it now.what he is doing may look or seem funny or irrelevant but he knows what he is doing.he refused to talk about whether degi and his affidavits but attacked the way the apex court interpreted inyang ekwo's judgment

In review...you look for any loophole, no matter how stupid it might seem at first.

Let me not ditch in a haste...but like I said ooo...on my own, there is no case. Unfortunately, it's Wole's job.

fergie001:

In review...you look for any loophole, no matter how stupid it might seem at first.

Let me not ditch in a haste...but like I said ooo...on my own, there is no case. Unfortunately, it's Wole's job.

That's a Good one

Dansuqi:

When me and ejimatic were hammering on how fatal the absence of the judge will be,did you not laugh as usual? Honestly,you shouldn't be arguing with me on this.

The matter will be decided on the amount of errors pointed out in the judhment or the weight of the errors.matters raised by lawyers in court and ignored by judges will be key not bringing entirely new things that were never canvassed like agabi is doing

.
Wale Olanipekun raised salient issues for consideration.These are not technical issues but what are in the constitution and electoral laws.While there are inconsistencies in Degi names the SC did not consider other parts of the electoral laws and constitution to prevail on the Bayelsa matters especially on voiding of votes.Let awaits the supreme court review on all the matters.

Dansuqi:

That is it.the constitution is silent if the invalidation of a candidate nullifies a party's mandate,it is the supreme court that formed this new law of when a party is disq,the next party takes over.it is illegal,it must stop.

it is also the law that a party is disqualified when they present false information to INEC and a fine of 500k is imposed aside disqualifying the party
In this case APC presented a false information to INEC about its candidate

surgical:
it is also the law that a party is disqualified when they present false information to INEC and a fine of 500k is imposed aside disqualifying the party
In this case APC presented a false information to INEC about its candidate

Can you state this law in the constitution?

surgical:
it is also the law that a party is disqualified when they present false information to INEC and a fine of 500k is imposed aside disqualifying the party
In this case APC presented a false information to INEC about its candidate

Well,there is no conclusive or exhaustive proof to show that he actually presented false information.where is the falsehood? Again,is it fundamental ?

ejimatic:
.
Wale Olanipekun raised salient issues for consideration.These are not technical issues but what are in the constitution and electoral laws.While there are inconsistencies in Degi names the SC did not consider other parts of the electoral laws and constitution to prevail on the Bayelsa matters especially on voiding of votes.Let awaits the supreme court review on all the matters.

Is it mandatory that a judge gives clear consequential orders in his judgment? Is there a clear difference between a judge saying you are guilty of the charges and also saying you are guilty and hereby sentenced to 5 years imprisonment?

Dansuqi:

They already did in imo.even if they do now,it will end up like the osun case.wole is at his strongest point

Osun case was manipulated for APC.

There is nothing anyone could have done.

Dansuqi:

Is it mandatory that a judge gives clear consequential orders in his judgment? Is there a clear difference between a judge saying you are guilty of the charges and also saying you are guilty and hereby sentenced to 5 years imprisonment?

. Judgement must be clear and devoid of ambiguity ....You are guilty as charged is a pronouncement of guilt, penalty is not indicated.So to make it full and complete sentence must accompany guilt. In law judges must do away with vagueness and ambiguity.

Can someone please enlighten me on why Olanipekun is touted a superman on electoral matters?

Which wins has he had (obviously many if this thread is an indicator) ? Can someone tell me landmark judgements he's won ?

TheChameleon:
Can someone please enlighten me on why Olanipekun is touted a superman on electoral matters?

Which wins has he had (obviously many if this thread is an indicator) ? Can someone tell me landmark judgements he's won ?

Them plenty

Right from 2007 when I first heard about Chief Wole Olanikpekun (SAN) he is very good in defending his clients from a defensive and disadvantaged position. A few cases comes to mind

1. Atiku Abubakar vs FG 2007 - In this particular case he defended Atiku Abubakar in the Supreme Court when OBJ removed him as the VP and got a landmark judgement in his favour where the Supreme Court ruled that the president and his vice are two inseparable twins that the president cannot wake up and remove his vice.

2. Atiku Abubakar vs INEC 2007 - Here the Supreme Court ruled INEC does not have power to disqualify any candidate.

3. Yardua PDP vs Buhari ANPP 2007

4. T. A Orji PPA vs Onyema Ugochukwu PDP 2007 - where in Appeal court PH he upturned the Tribunal judgement that disqualified T. A on the ground that he belonged to Okija Secret society and that he did not resign his appointment as the Chief of staff as at the time he contested for the GUBER election. The tribunal hence awarded victory to Onyema Ugochukwu on the grounds that he scored the second highest number of votes.

6. Osunbor vs Oshiomole 2007 - where he got victory for Oshiomole

7. Agagu vs Mimiko 2007 - where he also got victory for Mimiko.

8. Jonathan vs Buhari 2011

9. Wike vs Peterside 2016

10. Okezie Ikpeazu vs Alex Otti 2016 - Where he upturned the appeal Court judgement that deducted the votes of Ikpeazu and awarded victory to Alex otti

11. Okezie Ikpeazu vs Uche Ogah 2017

12. Eyiteyo Jegede vs Jimo Ibrahim

13. Uche Secondus vs Ali Modu Sheriff

14. Oyetola 's vs Adeleke

The only two cases I can remember he has lost is Faleke vs INEC and Umana Umana vs Udom Emmanuel.

In Umana and Umana vs Udom Emmanuel he lost because he argued from both sides of the mouth. Having defended Wike by arguing against carder hence there was no way he would have won in the case of Umana Umana by arguing for it again.

This is probably one case wole will lose. The case against the former deputy governor elect is grand.

Dansuqi:

I and wole are doing same but the foundation flows from degi.look at this below



It stated: “After reinstating the judgment of the trial court in the judgment of this honourobie court of the 13th February, 2020, in SC.1/2020 Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) & 2 Ors. v. Biobarakuma Degi-Eremienyo & 3 ors., this honourable court proceeded to disqualify the governorship candidate of the applicant (Lyon David Pereworimin) despite the fact that the trial High Court refused to grant the reliefs for his disqualification and there was no appeal against same.

“In this honourable court’s judgment of 13th February, 2020, the court erroneously and inadvertently stated that the trial High Court consequentially disqualified the applicant‘s governorship candidate even though the trial court made no such order and when the trial court indeed refused to grant the express orders sought by the plaintiffs therein for his disqualification.”

No be small thing o.

ejimatic:
. Judgement must be clear and devoid of ambiguity ....You are guilty as charged is a pronouncement of guilt, penalty is not indicated.So to make it full and complete sentence must accompany guilt. In law judges must do away with vagueness and ambiguity.

I agree.the issue of ambiguities and vagueness must always be avoided by judges.there are so many cases flogging these matter particularly amaechi vs pdp ors supra

kahal29:


Them plenty

Right from 2007 when I first heard about Chief Wole Olanikpekun (SAN) he is very good in defending his clients from a defensive and disadvantaged position. A few cases comes to mind

1. Atiku Abubakar vs FG 2007 - In this particular case he defended Atiku Abubakar in the Supreme Court when OBJ removed him as the VP and got a landmark judgement in his favour where the Supreme Court ruled that the president and his vice are two inseparable twins that the president cannot wake up and remove his vice.

2. Atiku Abubakar vs INEC 2007 - Here the Supreme Court ruled INEC does not have power to disqualify any candidate.

3. Yardua PDP vs Buhari ANPP 2007

4. T. A Orji PPA vs Onyema Ugochukwu PDP 2007 - where in Appeal court PH he upturned the Tribunal judgement that disqualified T. A on the ground that he belonged to Okija Secret society and that he did not resign his appointment as the Chief of staff as at the time he contested for the GUBER election. The tribunal hence awarded victory to Onyema Ugochukwu on the grounds that he scored the second highest number of votes.

6. Osunbor vs Oshiomole 2007 - where he got victory for Oshiomole

7. Agagu vs Mimiko 2007 - where he also got victory for Mimiko.

8. Jonathan vs Buhari 2011

9. Wike vs Peterside 2016

10. Okezie Ikpeazu vs Alex Otti 2016 - Where he upturned the appeal Court judgement that deducted the votes of Ikpeazu and awarded victory to Alex otti

11. Okezie Ikpeazu vs Uche Ogah 2017

12. Eyiteyo Jegede vs Jimo Ibrahim

13. Uche Secondus vs Ali Modu Sheriff

14. Oyetola 's vs Adeleke

The only two cases I can remember he has lost is Faleke vs INEC and Umana Umana vs Udom Emmanuel.

In Umana and Umana vs Udom Emmanuel he lost because he argued from both sides of the mouth. Having defended Wike by arguing against carder hence there was no way he would have won in the case of Umana Umana by arguing for it again.

Great comment, i really appreciate the level of detail and knowledge you have on this issue.

Is your 1st degree in Law ?

Dansuqi:

I agree.the issue of ambiguities and vagueness must always be avoided by judges.there are so many cases flogging these matter particularly amaechi vs pdp ors supra

. I agree with your submission .However there are even contradictory precedences on the matter.In Muazu 1999 a fresh election was ordered wvn when the ticket was joint.I believe SC should align its judgement on election considering diverse positions of the constitution and electoral act and arrive at a reconciliatory conclusion on it. This I think affects Bayelsa judgement and I think it should be reviewed regardless of the stupidity and inconsistency of names of the disqualified deputy governor.

isaacsegun:
A vote cast in an election is for the party but not for the candidate...let's wait and see what the outcome would be.

So what is the need for candidates. Why dont the parties win the election and then appoint whoever they want?

Dansuqi:

I and wole are doing same but the foundation flows from degi.look at this below



It stated: “After reinstating the judgment of the trial court in the judgment of this honourobie court of the 13th February, 2020, in SC.1/2020 Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) & 2 Ors. v. Biobarakuma Degi-Eremienyo & 3 ors., this honourable court proceeded to disqualify the governorship candidate of the applicant (Lyon David Pereworimin) despite the fact that the trial High Court refused to grant the reliefs for his disqualification and there was no appeal against same.

“In this honourable court’s judgment of 13th February, 2020, the court erroneously and inadvertently stated that the trial High Court consequentially disqualified the applicant‘s governorship candidate even though the trial court made no such order and when the trial court indeed refused to grant the express orders sought by the plaintiffs therein for his disqualification.”

Could David Lyon have run without a deputy? Is it legal?

PFRB:

Could David Lyon have run without a deputy? Is it legal?

That is not what the lawyer is pointing out

ejimatic:
. I agree with your submission .However there are even contradictory precedences on the matter.In Muazu 1999 a fresh election was ordered wvn when the ticket was joint.I believe SC should align its judgement on election considering diverse positions of the constitution and electoral act and arrive at a reconciliatory conclusion on it. This I think affects Bayelsa judgement and I think it should be reviewed regardless of the stupidity and inconsistency of names of the disqualified deputy governor.

My anger is that all cases of falsification and forgery against governors similar to that of degi were ruled in favor of governors.see agi vs ayade 2016 supra
Pdp vs wike 2019 supra
Nyong vs Donald duke 2004 supra
Useni vs lalong
Pdp vs masari.
They were clear cases of discrepancies and forgery but either the courts discountenanced the facts or declared them not fundamental in nature.there is no difference with that of bayelsa lalong,masari and wike's own were very glaring.

That of 1999 was from the appeal court so lets not cite it.
Even in pdp vs adeleke,glaring facts of falsification,impersonation and forgery were unearthed

Dansuqi:

My anger is that all cases of falsification and forgery against governors similar to that of degi were ruled in favor of governors.see agi vs ayade 2016 supra
Pdp vs wike 2019 supra
Nyong vs Donald duke 2004 supra
Useni vs lalong
Pdp vs masari.
They were clear cases of discrepancies and forgery but either the courts discountenanced the facts or declared them not fundamental in nature.there is no difference with that of bayelsa lalong,masari and wike's own were very glaring.

That of 1999 was from the appeal court so lets not cite it.
Even in pdp vs adeleke,glaring facts of falsification,impersonation and forgery were unearthed

. To add to your beautiful submission why is this affecting Lyon? Why voiding votes on joint ticket? Why not meteing punishment on the ering candidates? What did the CJN say on it when they were having in-house discussion on it? There must be consistency on SC judgment on election matter.

Many people don't know that the Bayelsa judgment by the supreme court was based on policy. The supreme court justices know that a lot of these politicians are certificate forgers and forgery, being an offence, cannot be resolved on affidavit evidence. From the evidence, Bayelsa deputy governor-elect appeared to have played some game with his certificates, which necessitated his having to swear to different questionable affidavits to cover up. The supreme court judgement must be seen in the context of the policy to put a stop to certificate forgery by politicians by punishing the culprit even if there is no criminal conviction.

TheChameleon:


Great comment, i really appreciate the level of detail and knowledge you have on this issue.

Is your 1st degree in Law ?

No Oooo

How his best was able to save the day?

IDeyNL:
How his best was able to save the day?

His best failed him today