May God help u

But u get big problem

I took my time to read all the 44 Grounds of Appeal of INEC against the Judgement of Majority Judgement of Osun EPTribunal. INEC clearly exposed Tribunal Chairman with the way and manner he decended to the ARENA by making the case for the Petitioners. The Grounds of Appeal of INEC have made the Appeal of Adeleke and PDP very simple and straight forward.
The people that have no little knowledge of law will conclude that INEC has no reasonable grounds of Appeal.
Justice Kume in his controversial majority Judgement contradicted himself in that Majority Judgement, contradiction in the Judgement is expected in a situation where a Judge decided to award victory to the Petitioners in respective of the facts being placed before the Judge/court.
I urge you all to go and read Controversial Majority Judgement of Osun EPTribunal and 44 Grounds of Appeal of INEC, then come back here to drop your comment. Kikikikiki kakakaka

Rolings:


Law operates on facts not emotions.
No amount of emorional blackmail will make law rely on emotions above facts.
No matter the presidential candidate you support....the judiciary has been there for them. So its uncharitable to condemn the judiciary when it didnt favour you and accept its decisions when they favour you only.

As per Akpabio and Lawan.....these are cases that needed to be decided by SC so as to reinforce party supremacy in our politics. As far as the Law is concerned its the party that has the final say on its choice of candidate....the candidate is not representing himself but flying the party s flag...he cant be bigger than that party

If SC reinforce party supremacy, then it means no need of primaries. Party leaders should just nominate candidates to fill all the elective positions.

Clevite:


https://punchng.com/judgement-sacking-me-not-majority-decision-adeleke-tells-appeal-court/?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1675984691

Which BVAS report was used to declare the results? Shnchronised or an unsychcronised report? APC INEC and Adeleke have BVAS reports and the three have iregularities and errors. Which one will AC accept? The AC will show us where syncronization is mentioned in the constitution.BVAS was on trial at the TB and it showed that results could be manipulated with BVAS.The BVAS is on trial again at the AC .let us await the decision of the AC on it. Additionally Section 294 of the constitution mandates AC and SC members to have a say in their Judgement. It does not apply to TB. Even if we have two minority judgements the AC and SC will bring their majority judgemenis.I however agree with Falana SAN that it will be difficult to upturn judgement sacking Adeleke at the AC and SC.

wirinet:


If SC reinforce party supremacy, then it means no need of primaries. Party leaders should just nominate candidates to fill all the elective positions.

In places where this is possible...its not illegal. In other states they conduct primaries for some elective posts while others they do indirect primaries where party memebers only come to affirm the candidate agreed on.

Each party have their own ways of doing things as far as its according to law. Theres provision for direct and indirect primaries.

Rolings:

In places where this is possible...its not illegal. In other states they conduct primaries for some elective posts while others they do indirect primaries where party memebers only come to affirm the candidate agreed on.

Each party have their own ways of doing things as far as its according to law. Theres provision for direct and indirect primaries.

That's not exactly correct. Indirect primaries does not mean party leaders nominate candidates for elective posts. What it means is that party leaders nominate delegates that will in turn vote on behalf of different constitutuences or interests in primary elections.

moscow007:
Whatever Thiefnibu cannot corrupt he destroys!

Make no mistake, the Judiciary is under attack by this demonic blood sucker of no Nation.

The Judiciary as a matter of urgency must raise up and resist Thiefnibu's cheap blackmails and financial inducement now!

Let it not come as a surprise when Thiefnibu approaches the court after losing in few weeks time, we are waiting for him.

Adeleke will make a nonsense of this Oshogbo Tribunal ruling at the appeal, just as we prepare to finally retire Thiefnibu at the Supreme Court in 2025 while President Obi holds sway in Aso Rock.

We don hear you Mr Joseph the dreamer!

KingOfTheDamned:
WE DONT CARE WHAT HAPPENS IN OSUN STATE


WE ARE FOCUSED ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION FOR NOW

Okay. Does that mean your preferred candidate don't need Osun State votes?

Clevite:
Ademola Adeleke and PDP's lawyers are most likely to have the Tribunal's judgement upturned on this technical ground than having the judgement upturned on merit at the appellate courts.

The third member of the Tribunal who is a Chief Magistrate supporting the Justice Kume's lead judgement nullifying the election of Ademola Adeleke by only co-signing the judgement, without making her own separate pronouncement, may be highly fatal to the victory delivered to APC and Gboyega Oyetola by the Tribunal.

yes Appeal court will upturned the tribunal judgement on this technicality.

[color=#000099][/color]

Rolings:


Law operates on facts not emotions.
No amount of emorional blackmail will make law rely on emotions above facts.
No matter the presidential candidate you support....the judiciary has been there for them. So its uncharitable to condemn the judiciary when it didnt favour you and accept its decisions when they favour you only.

As per Akpabio and Lawan.....these are cases that needed to be decided by SC so as to reinforce party supremacy in our politics. As far as the Law is concerned its the party that has the final say on its choice of candidate....the candidate is not representing himself but flying the party s flag...he cant be bigger than that party

Please stop making a fool of yourself! Are you saying that the political parties are superior to Nigerian constitution? Constitution recognised valid primary election which can only be overturned by death or presentation of letter of withdrawal by the candidate, these were not the case. The Nigerian judiciary is a joke. Hope you can still justify that Hope Uzodimma the Supreme Court governor of Imo State.

Thanks @Ejimatic for expressing this. From this interesting ground of appeal, one would have thought 9ja follows a different jurisprudence.
In saner clime, which isn't so much of saner climes but principle of law, ALL the Judges or Justices do not voice an opinion on majority judgement (leading judgement as called in 9ja or UK). When do Judges penned an opinion? They do when they have disagreement (like in the case of the 3rd panel member). When a Judge or Justice is in agreement (that is concur) but want to emphasise an aspect of law or express a different approach that would arrive at the same outcome but from another angle/perspective.
Invariably, all that is required is to concur or dissent.

_{“The second member of the lower Tribunal could not have validly signed the decision of the chairman of the lower Tribunal without an opinion.
“What was presented as the lead decision of the Tribunal is a nullity in fact and in law, not lead decision of the lower Tribunal.”}
In my view, this ground of appeal, if 9ja legal jurisprudence follow others, would be fantastically interesting. Hopefully, it's not a 'milking off' of client by the advocates/lawyers.
Be it as it may. I'll have to read up appropriate sections of the Constitution and Judicial Act on this aspect as what is applicable to 9ja.
In any case, one would expect a person in Adeleke's position, who affirms he's won correctly, to be raising factual appeal grounds rather than what would be construed as clutching at straw. Or maybe even those of Chapter VII s295 of the Constitution, or 285 read with 294.
I won't be surprised if parties rely on this (recent) ruling or one of the party has not updated themselves with this ruling. Seems the appellate court will have their hand full ventilating and considering this SC ruling.
See SC 84/2010, Nwagboso Ubani Ukoma & Ors Vs Seven-up Bottling Company Plc & Ors
Alternative link.

ejimatic:
. Section 294 of the constitution subsection 1 2 and 4 mandates AC and SC members to have a say in any judgement they make It doew not apply to TB . Whoever has something different can show us here for consideration. Additionally if both of them are minority judgements AC will decide another minority and majority judgement! ..My opinion.

I have said this in the days after the judgment that there's no tribunal judgment. The chairman and member 2 have just wasted everyone's time.

chrisxxx:

I am not a lawyer but this makes sense

There's no valid judgment of the tribunal that the appeal or supreme Court will adjudicate on. The appeal and supreme Court will ask for retrial by different panel which will become academic exercise because of time.

semmyk:
Thanks @Ejimatic for expressing this. From this interesting ground of appeal, one would have thought 9ja follows a different jurisprudence.
In saner clime, which isn't so much of saner climes but principle of law, ALL the Judges or Justices do not voice an opinion on majority judgement (leading judgement as called in 9ja or UK). When do Judges penned an opinion? They do when they have disagreement (like in the case of the 3rd panel member). When a Judge or Justice is in agreement (that is concur) but want to emphasise an aspect of law or express a different approach that would arrive at the same outcome but from another angle/perspective.
Invariably, all that is required is to concur or dissent.

_{“The second member of the lower Tribunal could not have validly signed the decision of the chairman of the lower Tribunal without an opinion.
“What was presented as the lead decision of the Tribunal is a nullity in fact and in law, not lead decision of the lower Tribunal.”}
In my view, this ground of appeal, if 9ja legal jurisprudence follow others, would be fantastically interesting. Hopefully, it's not a 'milking off' of client by the advocates/lawyers.
Be it as it may. I'll have to read up appropriate sections of the Constitution and Judicial Act on this aspect as what is applicable to 9ja.
In any case, one would expect a person in Adeleke's position, who affirms he's won correctly, to be raising factual appeal grounds rather than what would be construed as clutching at straw. Or maybe even those of Chapter VII s295 of the Constitution, or 285 read with 294.
I won't be surprised if parties rely on this (recent) ruling or one of the party has not updated themselves with this ruling. Seems the appellate court will have their hand full ventilating and considering this SC ruling.
See SC 84/2010, Nwagboso Ubani Ukoma & Ors Vs Seven-up Bottling Company Plc & Ors
Alternative link.

Nigeria Judiciary system is nothing to write home about. I hate this country with so much passion

garfield1, do you think the technical point raised by Adeleke’s lawyers is strong enough to upturn the decision of the tribunal?

Okay sir...

Rolings:


Law operates on facts not emotions.
No amount of emorional blackmail will make law rely on emotions above facts.
No matter the presidential candidate you support....the judiciary has been there for them. So its uncharitable to condemn the judiciary when it didnt favour you and accept its decisions when they favour you only.

As per Akpabio and Lawan.....these are cases that needed to be decided by SC so as to reinforce party supremacy in our politics. As far as the Law is concerned its the party that has the final say on its choice of candidate....the candidate is not representing himself but flying the party s flag...he cant be bigger than that party

Don't know what you have been smoking, but advise you lay off it

adee17:
There's no valid judgment of the tribunal that the appeal or supreme Court will adjudicate on. The appeal and supreme Court will ask for retrial by different panel which will become academic exercise because of time.

. Please give us the content of this judgement in relation to the need for the 3rd party to read her judgement so as to take it a majority judgement..I love our discussion.

[quote author=Rolings post=120778659]

Law operates on facts not emotions.
No amount of emorional blackmail will make law rely on emotions above facts.
No matter the presidential candidate you support....the judiciary has been there for them. So its uncharitable to condemn the judiciary when it didnt favour you and accept its decisions when they favour you only.

As per Akpabio and Lawan.....these are cases that needed to be decided by SC so as to reinforce party supremacy in our politics. As far as the Law is concerned its the party that has the final say on its choice of candidate....the candidate is not representing himself but flying the party s flag...he cant be bigger than that party[/quote

According to this your position on the supremacy of the party, why then do they ask people to obtain forms and contest primaries? Why does INEC monitors the primaries? Why couldn't the parties just handpick their candidates based on whatever criteria they deem fit.
I don't tink this your submission is right.

kingamaa:
Make APC no go steal this man's mandate through the courts. They've done it before in other states.

Osun people have spoken loud and clear. May the wish of the people stand. Amen

when pdp stole the mandate of the governorship election in Bayelsa and zamfara you were jubilating , now it turns around and you are crying. haba fear God

If per chance there's no valid judgement, then, in law wouldn't it then be that there would be nothing live before the appellate court? As in jurisdiction 101
Invariably, what would the appellate court be considering. What would be the matter at hand?

adee17:
There's no valid judgment of the tribunal that the appeal or supreme Court will adjudicate on. The appeal and supreme Court will ask for retrial by different panel which will become academic exercise because of time.

semmyk:
... ...
_{“The second member of the lower Tribunal could not have validly signed the decision of the chairman of the lower Tribunal without an opinion.
“What was presented as the lead decision of the Tribunal is a nullity in fact and in law, not lead decision of the lower Tribunal.”}
... ...
I won't be surprised if parties rely on this (recent) ruling or one of the party has not updated themselves with this ruling. Seems the appellate court will have their hand full ventilating and considering this SC ruling.
See SC 84/2010, Nwagboso Ubani Ukoma & Ors Vs Seven-up Bottling Company Plc & Ors
Alternative link.

How is majority or minority judgement determined in a panel of judges as applicable in supreme Court, court of appeal, judicial commission or tribunal? Every judge in that such panle must have an opinion expressed or written whether to concur or object to the lead rulling. Anything contrary cannot stand. This is a schoolboy error by the 2nd member of the tribunal. You have to say or write something; even simple words like 'I concur to the lead judgement' will suffice.

ejimatic:
. Please give us the content of this judgement in relation to the need for the 3rd party to read her judgement so as to take it a majority judgement..I love our discussion.

adee17:
How is majority or minority judgement determined in a panel of judges as applicable in supreme Court, court of appeal, judicial commission or tribunal? Every judge in that such panle must have an opinion expressed or written whether to concur or object to the lead rulling. Anything contrary cannot stand. This is a schoolboy error by the 2nd member of the tribunal. You have to say or write something; even simple words like 'I concur to the lead judgement' will suffice.

. Section 292 makes it compulsory for AC and SC to do so but this does not apply to TB. Any recent development on it or SC assertion on it that it concerns TB is needed and appreciated.

Trust22:
ONE THING IS SURE.... ADELEKE GOES NO WHERE..

And Buhari went all the way with without certificate

Clevite:


https://punchng.com/judgement-sacking-me-not-majority-decision-adeleke-tells-appeal-court/?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1675984691

Wow...In the real sense, how does dancing to Buga song come into a court judgement in an Election Matter? it clearly shows Bias as represented by this sane lawyer. Furthermore, the electoral act signed by Mr President and the National assembly clearly gives BVAS the right to accreditation but why would a sane judge take reports from other sources not recognized by law? This country sef tire me

By import, it will apply to the tribunal or any judicial commission where there is more than one judge adjudicating. In 2018 Osun election case, the appeal and supreme Courts emphasized that every member must present at all times and have opinions on the matter before them. The appellate courts dismissed the majority judgement of the tribunal because the judge that wrote the leading judgement was absent for one day during the trial.

ejimatic:
. Section 292 makes it compulsory for AC and SC to do so but this does not apply to TB. Any recent development on it or SC assertion on it that it concerns TB is needed and appreciated.

adee17:
By import, it will apply to the tribunal or any judicial commission where there is more than one judge adjudicating. In 2018 Osun election case, the appeal and supreme Courts emphasized that every member must present at all times and have opinions on the matter before them. The appellate courts dismissed the majority judgement of the tribunal because the judge that wrote the leading judgement was absent for one day during the trial.

. In 2018 the judge was absent on the day APC was presenting his witnesses and the same judge was appraiising the winesses he did not see. It was evident that he did not sign the register of attendance on the day APC was presenting the witnesses. Another judge should have read the judgment. Osun 2018 was different from 2022 where the judges attended the sittings and signed their judgements. By her signing the majority judgement it means she was in agreement with it. If she did not sign it was a nullity in law. The two judgements in my opinion stand but whether the majority judgement could be viwed as minority is our concern .This can be resolved if SC has made a statement on it before that it applies to TB.

The first and major issue that will be determined by the appellate courts is if there's a valid tribunal judgement before them. If they decide there's none, then the purported tribunal judgment will be nullified and order a retrial.

semmyk:
If per chance there's no valid judgement, then, in law wouldn't it then be that there would be nothing live before the appellate court? As in jurisdiction 101
Invariably, what would the appellate court be considering. What would be the matter at hand?

tempest01:
These lawyers sef.

The new electoral law recognises the bvas (electronic device deployed) not the server (database) as the means of accreditation.

In this dispute, any judgement that does not consider the data on the bvas but uses an unsynchronized server is agbado judgement.

We have had lots of these kind of judgement lately. With the Supreme Court currently on the super high way of a roasted corn.

Do you even understand the case at all, INEC admitted Adeleke was declared winner of Osun base on the unsynchronized results, which is what was given to APC and apc presented it in courts.
The legal implication of that is, Only the report used by INEC to declared ADELEKE can be use to Nullify or Uphold adeleke victory and that is what the court did, besides all the judges unanimously declared there was over voting on both the synchronized and unsynchronized.

Let not forget, all the judge unanimously ruled certificate forgery against Adeleke, going by the electoral even that judgement is potent enough to unsit Adeleke, it happened in bayelsa where david lyon under apc was sacked by the supreme court cos of his deputy forged certificate.

Clevite:
Ademola Adeleke and PDP's lawyers are most likely to have the Tribunal's judgement upturned on this technical ground than having the judgement upturned on merit at the appellate courts.

The third member of the Tribunal who is a Chief Magistrate supporting the Justice Kume's lead judgement nullifying the election of Ademola Adeleke by only co-signing the judgement, without making her own separate pronouncement, may be highly fatal to the victory delivered to APC and Gboyega Oyetola by the Tribunal.

Judges can co sign a judgment if their reasoning aligns.
There is no infraction there.