fergie001:
Lawan as Candidate ASAP.

then PDP will be waiting after the election.

INEC is an independent body If we are to follow Supreme court then there shouldn't any election.

Tareq1105:


Na mumu you be.

You want supreme court justices to adjudicate on pre-election matter strictly internal of APC?

You are a bolo .

Strictly internal kee you there . If “strictly internal “ negates the electoral laws , it is invalid . Mumu-ni Taprick

The supreme court is final.

saysoo:
then PDP will be waiting after the election.

PDP cannot do anything.

The tribunal cannot handle it, so the case is officially dead.

cydak:
For me the matter could still be filed as Writ of Summons considering that the APC refused to submit his name to INEC after winning the primaries, which automatically made it a contentious issue.

Exactly my question, does it mean the case can’t be filed properly again? Is there anything that stops Machina from approaching the court the right way again? Thanks.

litigator:



Supreme Court was right. Go and read the judgment. The case was not determined on the merit. So no confusion here.

The court didn’t make pronunciations on Section 115 nor did it interpret the law. The law stands as it is.

Allegations of fraud must be proved by oral evidence and not by way of affidavit evidence.

He, Machina, commenced his action by an originating summons which was in tandem with the practice direction but ran foul of the rules of court.

This is not the first time the apex court has deliver judgment on the fact that issues of fraud, which must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, must be commenced by a writ and not originating summons. It’s a bit trickish but the law is blind.

The Supreme Court didn’t even get an opportunity to decide the case in the merit as it concerns Section 115 of the Electoral Act.

The question before the court was whether or not the action was validly commenced and the court answered in the negative.

That’s all.

Don’t confuse the public. Ejoor.

I rest my case

The question is...

Did the Supreme Court Judgement “Pronounce” Lawan the rightful candidate?? (whereas Lawan’s Candidacy was not the Status-quo??)

If YES,, then on what grounds actually.??

fergie001:
PDP cannot do anything.

The tribunal cannot handle it, so the case is officially dead.

So now..,,,
The question is...

Did the Supreme Court Judgement “Pronounce” Lawan the rightful candidate?? (whereas Lawan’s Candidacy was not the Status-quo??)

If YES,, on what grounds actually.??

cydak:
For me the matter could still be filed as Writ of Summons considering that the APC refused to submit his name to INEC after winning the primaries, which automatically made it a contentious issue.

RealityGod:


Exactly my question, does it mean the case can’t be filed properly again? Is there anything that stops Machina from approaching the court the right way again? Thanks.

Time for it has passed.
Electoral cases are time-bound.

That is why the Supreme Court didn't even suggest it.


We all learn along the way.
This one had taught us another lesson again.

We Meeuuwvve

BluntCrazeMan:
The question is...

Did the Supreme Court Judgement “Pronounce” Lawan the rightful candidate?? (whereas Lawan’s Candidacy was not the Status-quo??)

If YES,, then on what grounds actually.??

The question will be on what premise?

What was the position of things before Machina commenced an action to recover his alleged mandate?

The position of things, from APC to INEC, was that Lawan was the authentic candidate and this was the reason Machina went to court to contest it.

If Machina fails in court on technical ground, what happens?

Things will simply go back to what it was before he commenced an action in court, right? There can be no vacuum. The law forbids vacuum.

It’s simple logic.

His prayers failed to compel INEC and APC accept him as the authentic candidate.

Perhaps if his prayers had contained an application seeking to conduct a fresh primaries, then it would have being a different ball game. Even if he didn’t raise at the trial court, he would raise this fresh prayer on appeal albeit with the leave of court.

But if that won’t have favoured him cos Lawan will still win it. The law is an ASS and could look foolish at times and sound unreasonable to the common man.

Like I said, it is trickish and the Court will only act on the prayers and reliefs before it. Recall that the court is not a Father Christmas. And won’t grant prayers not before it.

So the question remains on what premise.

Sometimes, you can help but marvel when you read certain judgment. But a litigator and an unrepentant disciple of legal technicalities, I appreciate Lawan’s legal team.

They are master tactician. Litigation is a battle and you may have a good case and a strong legal army and loose in court because the opposing party had a better plan and out maneuvered you and legal army.

Shalom

BluntCrazeMan:
So now..,,,
The question is...

Did the Supreme Court Judgement “Pronounce” Lawan the rightful candidate?? (whereas Lawan’s Candidacy was not the Status-quo??)

If YES,, on what grounds actually.??

Lawan's Candidacy was the status quo.

His Party submitted his name. Machina went to Court and won, the APC appealed up to the Apex Court.