Kahal,good morning

senatordave1:
I meant to say nwc,I corrected it.anyway,you have indirectly conceded to me.disqualification factors are not just in the constitution but also in the electoral act.I never said there are in the constitution alone....

...and also in INEC Guidelines.

The guidelines are drawn from the electoral act...infact,all penalties from a breach of any guidelines are stipulated whether through fines, disqualifications or otherwise, it is clearly spelt out.I am afraid there is no penalty for a chairman not signing.whatever inec is doing,there are on their own and I am sure it will not survive in courts.inec is not a lawmaking body,it is the duty of the nass and there have clearly stated what can lead to disqualification....

Let us not make it academic.....Now, Buni has signed for Uba, what happens?

senatordave1:



This thing is a simple matter,you are just making it hard.the court has not ruled on this that is why inec is behaving so.same supreme court that says inec should enforce its guidelines also said a breach of the guidelines is not fatal.same guidelines allowed inec to use the card reader which the court rejected.commonsensically,it means that inec can enforce its guidelines to a limit to the extent that it does not breach the disq factors spelt out by both the electoral act and the constitution....

Whenever a disqualification matter comes up,the supreme court has always turned to the constitution and electoral act and never to inec guidelines please.inec rejection of apc letter doesn't make it legal.the wise thing to do is to accept it and let the courts handle it.

INEC has said NO, they won't accept it based on their guidelines and regulations.

When INEC rejected the letter, did APC go to Court to defend their position?

fergie001:

...and also in INEC Guidelines.


Let us not make it academic.....Now, Buni has signed for Uba, what happens?

How many times have I told you that the ruling on the card reader means that inec guidelines must not be contrary to what the constitution or electoral act provides? Those guidelines just have to tally.


Technically,the nomination form is invalid because of buni but cancelling out buni signature or pretending to substitute and switching nomination forms without buni signature will be legally ok.

senatordave1:
Let me simplify it.the electoral act says the only means of accreditation is manual.inec tried to add card reader and failed.inectrying to add new disq factor will also fail...

It failed because the SC said so......We are saying the same thing....laws bow to Courts.
Has the SC said otherwise on this?

The only guideline that can lead to disqualification will be submitting names outside the inec window or doing primaries outside window but dont forget that the electoral act already legalized this when it provided inec deadlines as to when to conduct primaries and paste names before elections

INEC gives 4 guidelines that Parties must strictly follow but you say only one can disqualify a Party.

That means you are choosing the guidelines to follow.

fergie001:

INEC has said NO, they won't accept it based on their guidelines and regulations.

When INEC rejected the letter, did APC go to Court to defend their position?

You are unnecessarily dragging this matter.what inec says doesn't matter,what supreme court says is the koko.the supreme court already stated the boundaries of their so-called regulations.you can never see the court refer to any strange inec law when judging any election matter.apga breached the electoral act yet the penalty was just a fine.is it now an inec manufactured guideline that will now exclude a party? Reason am na...

Apc not going to court is their foolishness which they are regretting.everyone thought buni committee is ok until someone approached the court.

fergie001:

It failed because the SC said so......We are saying the same thing....laws bow to Courts.
Has the SC said otherwise on this?


INEC gives 4 guidelines that Parties must strictly follow but you say only one can disqualify a Party.

That means you are choosing the guidelines to follow.

It is clear that based on similar precedents,the court will rule against inec na when it reaches them na.someone said none signing is worthless and rejected the card reader.what does that tell you? Not all inec guidelines carry the same penalties.some are fatal ESO those tied to the electoral act.those that are not are not fatal but it is better you follow them...

The card reader failed because the law does not provide for it,it provides for manual...again,the conditions for nullifying elections are clearly spelt out and card reader no follow.those are the reason and not because the court just said so out of the blues according to you.

senatordave1:
How many times have I told you that the ruling on the card reader means that inec guidelines must not be contrary to what the constitution or electoral act provides? Those guidelines just have to tally.

Tell me the guideline or law that clashes with the Constitution and does not now?

I have said it before if there is a clash, it must bow, be it electoral law, APC Constitution or even PDP's.

The Guidelines isn't higher than the Constitution but it be read side by side with the electoral act and the Constitution to give it its ordinary meaning.

Why is it that when INEC gives you a timetable you stick to it? Their laws.

Why is it that the name must be submitted and/or substituted in line with INEC's position....their laws.

Why is it that they will need your forms cf001& cf002 submitted and counter-signed by both? Their laws.

Unless the Court says otherwise, it stands.

It is INEC's responsibility to inscribe Guidelines to make their job easier and more efficient, but when it is at variance with the Constitution...the Court will hit the hammer.

Technically,the nomination form is invalid because of buni but cancelling out buni signature or pretending to substitute and switching nomination forms without buni signature will be legally ok.

Not according to INEC. APC had the opportunity of challenging it in Ondo and they didn't.

senatordave1:


You are unnecessarily dragging this matter.what inec says doesn't matter,what supreme court says is the koko.the supreme court already stated the boundaries of their so-called regulations.you can never see the court refer to any strange inec law when judging any election matter.apga breached the electoral act yet the penalty was just a fine.is it now an inec manufactured guideline that will now exclude a party? Reason am na...

APGA did not breach any Electoral Act.

Barr. Jude Okeke followed all protocols.

The Oye-faction not following the 21-days issue is before the Court.

APC not going to court is their foolishness which they are regretting.everyone thought buni committee is ok until someone approached the Court.

They all knew that's why they delayed the National Chairman signing.

The matter started from the Lagos APC....then went to Hillard Eta...they knew, they damned it.

senatordave1:
It is clear that based on similar precedents,the court will rule against inec na when it reaches them na.someone said none signing is worthless and rejected the card reader.what does that tell you? Not all inec guidelines carry the same penalties.some are fatal ESO those tied to the electoral act.those that are not are not fatal but it is better you follow them...

Yes, so what happens when INEC sends a letter to the party that they will not accept the form unless the National Chairman column is signed? When the Court helps us there...we will know.

But INEC has said it plenty times that they deal with the National Chairmen of the Parties. The National Chairman chairs NEC, NWC and is the man that literally controls the Party.

Infact, if there is only one column....It is the National Chairman that should sign.

The card reader failed because the law does not provide for it,it provides for manual...again,the conditions for nullifying elections are clearly spelt out and card reader no follow.those are the reason and not because the court just said so out of the blues according to you.

INEC's nice idea on card reader is in conflict with the Constitution, I think we have re-echoed that.

If INEC refuse to accept your form....you can't stand for election. As it is today, can Soludo stand for election?

Does PDP have a candidate? INEC will stick to its own and I believe the Courts will back them because of the series of litigations they have encountered in the past.

fergie001:

Tell me the guideline or law that clashes with the Constitution and does not now?

I have said it before if there is a clash, it must bow, be it electoral law, APC Constitution or even PDP's.

The Guidelines isn't higher than the Constitution but it be read side by side with the electoral act and the Constitution to give it its ordinary meaning.

Why is it that when INEC gives you a timetable you stick to it? Their laws.

Why is it that the name must be submitted and/or substituted in line with INEC's position....their laws.

Why is it that they will need your forms cf001& cf002 submitted and counter-signed by both? Their laws.

Unless the Court says otherwise, it stands.

It is INEC's responsibility to inscribe Guidelines to make their job easier and more efficient, but when it is at variance with the Constitution...the Court will hit the hammer.


Not according to INEC. APC had the opportunity of challenging it in Ondo and they didn't.

From the bolded,you are not following me.we settled this earlier.section 30 to 32 of the electoral act already provided for everything you raised in the bolded.the electoral act already gave a timeline for when parties will do primaries,submit names,inec to paste names and conduct elections and inec guidelines simply tallies with it.why can't you understand these key points? I

Now,if you look further,you will notice that a breach by parties during the time of primaries to nomination attract fines ranging from 100 to 500k.

Therefore,excluding a party because of a chairman not signing does not marry with neither the constitution or electoral act

fergie001:

APGA did not breach any Electoral Act.

Barr. Jude Okeke followed all protocols.

The Oye-faction not following the 21-days issue is before the Court.


They all knew that's why they delayed the National Chairman signing.

The matter started from the Lagos APC....then went to Hillard Eta...they knew, they damned it.

You are very funny.you already provided a court ruling from zamfara guber that stated that a breach of the 21 days can be remedied by inec monitoring the primaries or at best a fine.even the electoral act supports it

fergie001:

Yes, so what happens when INEC sends a letter to the party that they will not accept the form unless the National Chairman column is signed? When the Court helps us there...we will know.

But INEC has said it plenty times that they deal with the National Chairmen of the Parties. The National Chairman chairs NEC, NWC and is the man that literally controls the Party.

Infact, if there is only one column....It is the National Chairman that should sign.


INEC's nice idea on card reader is in conflict with the Constitution, I think we have re-echoed that.

If INEC refuse to accept your form....you can't stand for election. As it is today, can Soludo stand for election?

Does PDP have a candidate? INEC will stick to its own and I believe the Courts will back them because of the series of litigations they have encountered in the past.

I can bet you with anything that the supreme court will not back inec on this.the card reader is in conflict with the electoral act to you.so disq based on non signing is not in conflict with the electoral act? Funny. Disqualification is a serious matter sir and the courts have clearly ruled on this time without number.the supreme court that stopped inec from using the card reader cannot turn around to allow it manufacture alien disq laws...


Another example is inec power to deregister political parties.inec tried to deregister parties in the past but was stopped because it had no such powers.the constitution was amended and inec empowered to deregister parties and the supreme court obliged them.can't you read the handwriting?

senatordave1:
I can bet you with anything that the supreme court will not back inec on this.the card reader is in conflict with the electoral act to you.so disq based on non signing is not in conflict with the electoral act? Funny. Disqualification is a serious matter sir and the courts have clearly ruled on this time without number.the supreme court that stopped inec from using the card reader cannot turn around to allow it manufacture alien disq laws

When they say an issue is in conflict, what does that mean?

..... It means any law, act, guideline whose position has a clash with the Constitution, the latter comes top.

Section 138 of the Electoral Act states that anyone who feels aggrieved that the nomination or sponsorship of a candidate did not follow the rules, can approach a tribunal.

But we have seen that it is in conflict with Section 285 of the 4th alteration which clearly states issues that should be pre-election or Post-Election. The Constitutions wins...we saw it in ANDP v Diri.

It is clear, INEC isn't manufacturing disqualification laws... I have told you before that before an election, INEC stipulates guidelines that must be strictly followed, one of which is that both National Officers must sign.

Why are you picking the INEC window and leaving the signature part.?

Since INEC is manufacturing disqualification laws....Like in Anambra, the deadline for Primaries was July 1, now answer the following questions:
1. What happens when the party now informs INEC that it intends to hold its Primary on July 2nd?

2. If INEC refuses to monitor the Primary and they go ahead and elect officers, and then their National Chairman and Secretary signs and submits to INEC, will INEC honour it?

Waiting for answers.....

senatordave1:
You are very funny.you already provided a court ruling from zamfara guber that stated that a breach of the 21 days can be remedied by inec monitoring the primaries or at best a fine.even the electoral act supports it

Oye breached it not APGA.... APGA's candidate as at today is Umeoji and Barr. Okeke (Ag. National Chairman) gave INEC the required 21 days.

fergie001:

When they say an issue is in conflict, what does that mean?

..... It means any law, act, guideline whose position has a clash with the Constitution, the latter comes top.

Section 138 of the Electoral Act states that anyone who feels aggrieved that the nomination or sponsorship of a candidate did not follow the rules, can approach a tribunal.

But we have seen that it is in conflict with Section 285 of the 4th alteration which clearly states issues that should be pre-election or Post-Election. The Constitutions wins...we saw it in ANDP v Diri.

It is clear, INEC isn't manufacturing disqualification laws... I have told you before that before an election, INEC stipulates guidelines that must be strictly followed, one of which is that both National Officers must sign.

Why are you picking the INEC window and leaving the signature part.?

Since INEC is manufacturing disqualification laws....Like in Anambra, the deadline for Primaries was July 1, now answer the following questions:
1. What happens when the party now informs INEC that it intends to hold its Primary on July 2nd?

2. If INEC refuses to monitor the Primary and they go ahead and elect officers, and then their National Chairman and Secretary signs and submits to INEC, will INEC honour it?

Waiting for answers.....

Inec rejecting apc nomination form is clashing with the constitution which has provided direct grounds for that including the electoral act.
You are totally misunderstanding or misapprehending the whole issues.I already told you that the electoral act from section 30 gave inec deadlines or window on when parties should conduct orimaries, submit names etc.therefore inec guidelines and deadline on anambra election is already provided by the electoral act directly.inec simply creates a timetable that will fall in line with that.so,any party that fails to obey that will go in for that.the laws are silent on nomination and signatures.inec has not been empowered to reject any nomination form not signed by a chairman. Why can't you spot the difference?

In the past,inec tried to deregister parties but the court stopped them until recently when there was an amendment giving them reregistration powers.they tried to exclude candidates that were indicted by panels but the court overruled them eg atiku in 2007. History has shown that whenever inec tries to do what the constitution or electoral act does not specify, the court always stops them.sir,the court will still stop them this time

fergie001:

Oye breached it not APGA.... APGA's candidate as at today is Umeoji and Barr. Okeke (Ag. National Chairman) gave INEC the required 21 days.

Why are you changing the narratives na? Accept defeat jor.oga,whoever breaches it does not lead to disqualification according to the electoral act.lol

fergie001:

This settles my position. No be me write am.

Unless they get an Ag. National Chairman, by Buni resigning between today & tomorrow,

Then submit another name other than Uba's.....I have no comment.

senatordave1 ejimatic kahal29 vicdom seerade029 indispensable85 penguin2

I was in the case from the tribunal up to the Supreme Court today


The dissenting decisions have no basis and clearly stood the constitution up side down .. very illogical and perverse too


Mala Buni is not occupying any other “executive office “ withen the meaning and contemplation of the constitution.. a party office is NOT an executive office

The constitution had in its schedule specifically spelt out “executive offices”


Aside the fact that he was not joined to the suit the constitution prescribed the punishment for any president or Governor who takes up another appointment... impeachment

NOT the voiding of actions he took as a political party member .,.


What is more the person advancing the issue is not a member of the APC but another party .. he lacks the locus having abandoned all the grounds of corrupt practices and attack on the election proper etc.. a case of crying more than the bereaved...

The arguments he advanced fruitlessly from the tribunal was clearly a pre election matter not fit for an election tribunal

These arguments and more were upheld by the majority

Pls always share majority decisions too

Kemi Pinhero SAN

This is another legal opinion on the matter. However, I think it’s in the overall interest of the party that Mai Buni should resign or be removed immediately. He’s already facing a legality issue so there is no point leaving him in office when things can still be corrected.

senatordave1:
INEC rejecting apc nomination form is clashing with the Constitution which has provided direct grounds for that including the electoral act.

You are totally misunderstanding or misapprehending the whole issues.I already told you that the electoral act from section 30 gave inec deadlines or window on when parties should conduct Primaries, submit names etc.therefore inec guidelines and deadline on anambra election is already provided by the electoral act directly.

It is not clashing with the Constitution. Until the Court says otherwise....

You earlier quoted Sections (30-32) of the Electoral Act that talks about timetable and schedule of elections, let me ask you the following?

What is the Penalty for not submitting names under INEC window, based on that Electoral Act you quoted? NOTHING

Was it stated in that Electoral Act? NO

Was it a disqualification factor? NO

Were you even asked to pay a fine? NO

So why do political parties make sure they beat the window?

Again, why did INEC disqualify the ANDP candidate in Bayelsa since they have no right to reject or disqualify any candidate?

Now, when ANDP fielded an ineligible candidate and were informed, they tried to replace him, but it was past INEC deadline?
INEC rejected it, stating that they were right to abide by their position. Why did the SC uphold INEC's decision?

INEC simply creates a timetable that will fall in line with that.so,any party that fails to obey that will go in for that.the laws are silent on nomination and signatures.inec has not been empowered to reject any nomination form not signed by a chairman. Why can't you spot the difference?

So, who should submit the name?
INEC has rejected before and will keep on rejecting. Let the aggrieved go to Court.

In the past, INEC tried to deregister parties but the court stopped them until recently when there was an amendment giving them reregistration powers.

The Court stopped some of them not because INEC didn't have deregistration powers but because there was a live suit on the issue before INEC acted. The matter is still at the SC.

...they tried to exclude candidates that were indicted by panels but the court overruled them eg atiku in 2007.

Yes.....that wasn't from INEC guidelines but from the 1999 Constitution. One of the disqualification factors for Office of the President. INEC misinterpreted it and the Court kept them in line.

History has shown that whenever INEC tries to do what the Constitution or Electoral Act does not specify, the court always stops them.sir,the court will still stop them this time

Before or after Buni has signed? The ship has sailed already.
Uba is gone.

senatordave1:
Why are you changing the narratives na? Accept defeat jor.oga,whoever breaches it does not lead to disqualification according to the electoral act.lol

I have replied and mentioned you on vicdom's thread.

seunmsg:
This is another legal opinion on the matter. However, I think it’s in the overall interest of the party that Mai Buni should resign or be removed immediately. He’s already facing a legality issue so there is no point leaving him in office when things can still be corrected.

The tribunal, Appeal Court and Supreme Court did not dispute that Buni was in violation.

If he likes himself and the Party does too....doing it today isn't bad.

[quote author=fergie001 post=104199942]
This settles my position. No be me write am.

Unless they get an Ag. National Chairman, by Buni resigning between today & tomorrow,

Then submit another name other than Uba's.....I have no comment.

senatordave1 ejimatic kahal29 vicdom seerade029 indispensable85 penguin2[/quote It is time for APC toreplace Buni now or organiser a convention now for the NWC composition.but the party is afraid it may lead to another crisis.The truth is Buni has overstayed his acting position as the Acting Chairman.Replacement now.]

fergie001:

This settles my position. No be me write am.

Unless they get an Ag. National Chairman, by Buni resigning between today & tomorrow,

Then submit another name other than Uba's.....I have no comment.
I
senatordave1 ejimatic kahal29 vicdom seerade029 indispensable85 penguin2

. It is time for APC to replace Buni now or organise a convention now for the NWC composition.but the party is afraid it may lead to another crisis.The truth is Buni has overstayed his acting position as the Acting Chairman and in view of the SC position the APC congresses should be suspended now.Wil they do that?
Replacement now.]

fergie001:

This settles my position. No be me write am.

Unless they get an Ag. National Chairman, by Buni resigning between today & tomorrow,

Then submit another name other than Uba's.....I have no comment.

senat.ordave1 eji
matic kah.al29 vicd..om seer.ade029 indispe..nsable85 pen..guin2

APC should get their acts together, if not

OYO

If Soludo is gone, Maduka gone, uba will also be gone

It'll be between valentine and YPP or so

fergie001:


It is not clashing with the Constitution. Until the Court says otherwise....

You earlier quoted Sections (30-32) of the Electoral Act that talks about timetable and schedule of elections, let me ask you the following?

What is the Penalty for not submitting names under INEC window, based on that Electoral Act you quoted? NOTHING

Was it stated in that Electoral Act? NO

Was it a disqualification factor? NO

Were you even asked to pay a fine? NO

So why do political parties make sure they beat the window?

Again, why did INEC disqualify the ANDP candidate in Bayelsa since they have no right to reject or disqualify any candidate?

Now, when ANDP fielded an ineligible candidate and were informed, they tried to replace him, but it was past INEC deadline?
INEC rejected it, stating that they were right to abide by their position. Why did the SC uphold INEC's decision?


So, who should submit the name?
INEC has rejected before and will keep on rejecting. Let the aggrieved go to Court.


The Court stopped some of them not because INEC didn't have deregistration powers but because there was a live suit on the issue before INEC acted. The matter is still at the SC.


Yes.....that wasn't from INEC guidelines but from the 1999 Constitution. One of the disqualification factors for Office of the President. INEC misinterpreted it and the Court kept them in line.


Before or after Buni has signed? The ship has sailed already.
Uba is gone.


I have replied and mentioned you on vicdom's thread.

The court does not need to telll you everything before you know what is wrong or right.similar issues have ended against you.it is commonsensical that any party which does not do primaries or submit name within the stipulated time is not part of the primaries.at least,the electoral act,stipulated that parties must do primaries and submit names on times.previous rulings of the supreme court has placed this as a disqualifying factor...with due respect,your points arw very weak and watery.


I would have brought that bayelsa matter since but thank goodness you brought it.it is a disqualifying or excluding factor directly enshrined by the constitution so it supports my claim.I never said inec had no disq powers,I said they dont except as stated in our laws not inec laws.inexlc guidelines more or less govern conduct or elections and does not disqualify anybody..you cannot elevate it to a disq factor except by the nass.you need to re read that zamfara ruling,no reliance was ever placed on discrepancies on the nomination form,it was purely about non holding of primaries by nwc.if you argue,I go paste am here ohh...

Between 2010 and 2016,inec has tried to deregister parties and the courts overruled them,they didn't have the powers to deregister powers by then.inec claimed its rule empowered them,just as in the case of the card reader.smell the coffee..
Same inec tried to conduct an election in anambra in 2007 based on a misunderstanding of the constitution but failed.is it not clear that inec cannot exclude a party or candidate without the constitution or electoral act saying so? Why are you dragging this matter needlessly?

seunmsg:


I was in the case from the tribunal up to the Supreme Court today


The dissenting decisions have no basis and clearly stood the constitution up side down .. very illogical and perverse too


Mala Buni is not occupying any other “executive office “ withen the meaning and contemplation of the constitution.. a party office is NOT an executive office

The constitution had in its schedule specifically spelt out “executive offices”


Aside the fact that he was not joined to the suit the constitution prescribed the punishment for any president or Governor who takes up another appointment... impeachment

NOT the voiding of actions he took as a political party member .,.


What is more the person advancing the issue is not a member of the APC but another party .. he lacks the locus having abandoned all the grounds of corrupt practices and attack on the election proper etc.. a case of crying more than the bereaved...

The arguments he advanced fruitlessly from the tribunal was clearly a pre election matter not fit for an election tribunal

These arguments and more were upheld by the majority

Pls always share majority decisions too

Kemi Pinhero SAN

This is another legal opinion on the matter. However, I think it’s in the overall interest of the party that Mai Buni should resign or be removed immediately. He’s already facing a legality issue so there is no point leaving him in office when things can still be corrected.

The SAN made a stupid submission.

Aside the constitution banning a sitting Governor from holding any other executive position, the SAN forgot to acknowledge the fact that APC constitution also stipulates that no NWC member must hold any other executive position anywhere.

Seerade029:


APC should get their acts together, if not

OYO

If Soludo is gone, Maduka gone, uba will also be gone

It'll be between valentine and YPP or so

PDP don't have a candidate for now.

fergie001:

PDP don't have a candidate for now.

Wah ala

senatordave1:
The court does not need to telll you everything before you know what is wrong or right.

Exactly that signature means authentication.

it is commonsensical that any party which does not do primaries or submit name within the stipulated time is not part of the primaries.

And not commonsensical that the National Chairman will sign?

At least,the electoral act,stipulated that parties must do primaries and submit names on times.previous rulings of the supreme court has placed this as a disqualifying factor...with due respect,your points arw very weak and watery.

It is also trite that Signature of the man who controls the Party is sine qua non for transactions between the Party and outside.

I would have brought that bayelsa matter since but thank goodness you brought it.it is a disqualifying or excluding factor directly enshrined by the constitution so it supports my claim.

Is INEC the Court?
When ANDP substituted that name after the window, why did INEC refuse to accept since there is no penalty in Sections (30-32) of the Electoral Act. Since it must be so written in the Constitution or Electoral Act, to qualify as a disqualifying factor (according to you)?

I never said inec had no disq powers,I said they dont except as stated in our laws not inec laws.inexlc guidelines more or less govern conduct or elections and does not disqualify anybody..

You didn't answer the questions in bold. Following from a previous argument, does INEC have the power to exclude anybody no matter the crime, following your celebrated 2007 SC Judgement?

you cannot elevate it to a disq factor except by the nass.you need to re read that zamfara ruling,no reliance was ever placed on discrepancies on the nomination form,it was purely about non holding of primaries by nwc.if you argue,I go paste am here ohh...

Nobody said it was about discrepancies on nomination form.

I have the judgement, you didn't answer the questions in bold.
You said signature isn't a disqualifying factor because it is not in the Constitution or Electoral Act....but in INEC Guidelines.

With Sections 30-32, what is the consequence of not conducting Primary within the stipulated INEC window even if you subscribe to the 90-day rule?

Between 2010 and 2016,inec has tried to deregister parties and the courts overruled them,they didn't have the powers to deregister powers by then. INEC claimed its rule empowered them,just as in the case of the card reader.smell the coffee..

I have the judgement of INEC v Balarabe & Ors. INEC based the disqualification on Sections 74 & 76 of the Electoral Act as well as their Guidelines, which conflicts with Section 222 at the time.
What did we say will happen when any law comes in conflict with the Constitution?

You are going here and there.

Same INEC tried to conduct an election in anambra in 2007 based on a misunderstanding of the constitution but failed.

Same as the Atiku 2007 issue. When they fail, the Courts put them in line.

is it not clear that INEC cannot exclude a party or candidate without the constitution or electoral act saying so?

Does INEC reserve the right to exclude any candidate at all?

Why are you dragging this matter needlessly?

You are the one trying to be right under clear excruciating circumstances for the APC.
What you are dragging is academic.

The APC still has today to recall its letter and allow only the National Secretary SIGN, let us test the jurisprudence of the Courts (Won't you like this idea)?

I have asked you for the umpteenth time....INEC have stated they will not accept signature from the National Secretary in isolation......What will the Party do?

Seerade029:
Wah ala

The last day for submission of names is tomorrow

fergie001:

Exactly that signature means authentication.


And not commonsensical that the National Chairman will sign?


It is also trite that Signature of the man who controls the Party is sine qua non for transactions between the Party and outside.


Is INEC the Court?
When ANDP substituted that name after the window, why did INEC refuse to accept since there is no penalty in Sections (30-32) of the Electoral Act. Since it must be so written in the Constitution or Electoral Act, to qualify as a disqualifying factor (according to you)?


You didn't answer the questions in bold. Following from a previous argument, does INEC have the power to exclude anybody no matter the crime, following your celebrated 2007 SC Judgement?


Nobody said it was about discrepancies on nomination form.

I have the judgement, you didn't answer the questions in bold.
You said signature isn't a disqualifying factor because it is not in the Constitution or Electoral Act....but in INEC Guidelines.

With Sections 30-32, what is the consequence of not conducting Primary within the stipulated INEC window even if you subscribe to the 90-day rule?


I have the judgement of INEC v Balarabe & Ors. INEC based the disqualification on Sections 74 & 76 of the Electoral Act as well as their Guidelines, which conflicts with Section 222 at the time.
What did we say will happen when any law comes in conflict with the Constitution?

You are going here and there.


Same as the Atiku 2007 issue. When they fail, the Courts put them in line.


Does INEC reserve the right to exclude any candidate at all?


You are the one trying to be right under clear excruciating circumstances for the APC.
Whar you are dragging is academic Buni has signed is Buni has signed.

I have asked you for the umpteenth time....INEC have stated they will not accept signature from the National Secretary in isolation......What will the Party do?

It is Simple. INEC will not accept it hence the Party should go to Court, right?

Let us wait till it gets to court then but for the records,I never defended buni signing.I am only saying the signature of the secretary is enough and that inec cannot formulate new disqualifying conditions outside what is embedded in the constitution and electoral act...for now,status quo be maintained until it is challenged

Penguin2:


The SAN made a stupid submission.

Aside the constitution banning a sitting Governor from holding any other executive position, the SAN forgot to acknowledge the fact that APC constitution also stipulates that no NWC member must hold any other executive position anywhere.

The apc constitution does not come in here until an apc member takes it to court

senatordave1:
Let us wait till it gets to court then but for the records,I never defended buni signing.I am only saying the signature of the secretary is enough and that inec cannot formulate new disqualifying conditions outside what is embedded in the constitution and electoral act...for now,status quo be maintained until it is challenged

I agree with the bolded.