Penguin2:


Fantastic.

Now what do you think that means to Obi and Atiku’s argument of Tinubu not satisfying the constitutional provision by failing to get 25% in the FCT?

If it is established now that the Supreme Court has defined AND as a conjunctive, the implication is that “AND the FCT” is a separate requirement that must be satisfied before one can be declared president.

Or will the Supreme Court come back now and define AND as a disjunctive?

totit:



Loool


Buhari already took Obasanjo to court for not getting 25% in FCT.......he lost the case!

https://old.nigerialii.org/ng/judgment/supreme-court/2003/6

totit:


You obviously didn't read it.

Light777:
That was in 2003..

[b]The latest as regards this[/b]supreme court legal interpretation is in 2008.

senatordave1:


If you read that ruling,the supreme court said it is not necessary in all cases.again,section 299 has already given tinubu an advantage

Light777:
That was in 2003..

The latest as regards this supreme court legal interpretation is in 2008.

Penguin2:


See the link you provided and the issues raised by the petitioner, Buhari.

There was no mention of 25% in the FCT in the case.

Can you post a screenshot of the part that talked about 25% in the FCT?

That the first respondent (now first appellant) was not validly elected by a majority of lawful votes cast in the election and did not receive 25 percent of votes cast in two-thirds of the States of the Federation and Federal Capital Territory, Abuja as required by the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria."



https://old.nigerialii.org/ng/judgment/supreme-court/2003/6

totit:


You obviously didn't read it.

Penguin2:


Again, a simple Google search makes nonsense of your claim.

Below is the result of the 2003 Presidential Election in Nigeria. A study of the result will show you that Obasanjo won in 25 States of the Federation and the FCT.

How then did Buhari take Obasanjo to court for not scoring 25% in the FCT?

Why do some of you engage in this kind of mischievous lies, stupid propaganda, propagation of falsehood and deliberate misinformation of the public?

totit:


Of course, a simple google search actually provided the information, a link to the copied link.

Stop arguing with emotion.


Search ;

how 25% in FCT case between Obasanjo and Buhari was won in supreme court

totit:


Of course, a simple google search actually provided the information, a link to the copied link.

Stop arguing with emotion.


Search ;

how 25% in FCT case between Obasanjo and Buhari was won in supreme court

Igboid:


Stop being funny, obasanjo won 49% of votes in FCT in 2003.
See results here:https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pulse.ng/news/politics/2003-presidential-election-how-nigerians-voted/m7fn68j.amp

You Tinubu boys are not brightest bulb on the Christmas tree.

tinsel:
He did not site the case? Disgraced SAN. He is even dressed as a lawyer? Was he not disrobed?

id911:


Stop this misinformation and falsehood. There was no case like 25% against OBJ in Abuja because the two candidates scored more than 25% then. At least I voted in 2003 and followed the case closely till the end.

Like the other guy said, the Supreme Court has already ruled and defined 'AND' as a conjunctive. The implication is that 'AND' in relation to the FCT is a separate requirement that must be satisfied before one can be declared elected. I don't know where they're going to manufacture another ruling against that.

PerfectMan24:

Truth is bitter

totit:

Penguin2:


Read section 299(d) and come back when you are done.

totit:


Of course, a simple google search actually provided the information, a link to the copied link.

Stop arguing with emotion.


Search ;

how 25% in FCT case between Obasanjo and Buhari was won in supreme court

senatordave1:


They never made such a ruling.both yaradua and buhari got 25% in fct so it never came up.what they ruled on was the meaning and importance of AND.see buhari vs yaradua supra.

senatordave1:


Again,the supreme court in another ruling said the fct is neither inferior nor superior to any state.

wegevv:


My best friend is correct here ❤️

Looked into this the other day and the only case I found focused on the word “AND” used somewhere else in the constitution. That case said the word “AND” is conjunctive but that doesn’t necessarily apply to the whole constitution

Aondoaka was being very mischievous in that video

tinsel:
He did not site the case? Disgraced SAN. He is even dressed as a lawyer? Was he not disrobed?

Penguin2:


You are not making sense.

How would 25% in the FCT be a matter of litigation against Obasanjo when he won the FCT in 2003?

Again, there was no mention of 25% in the FCT in the case you provided its link.

I’ve asked you to take a screenshot of where it was mentioned in the case like I’ve been taking screenshots of my own claims but you are not doing it.

Rest abeg.

totit:


Very well.
The Court will do justice to this and everybody can rest.

GhaliNaaba:
Dont be daft.

Penguin2:


It’s good that you have now accepted that the only precedent about 25% in the FCT ever set by the Supreme Court is in favour of Obi’s case.

That’s what I wanted to make clear to you beyond every reasonable doubt.

totit:


Ok.

Penguin2:


See the full provision below.

It’s talking about the administration of the FCT and not as it partains its place as a constitutional requirement for winning the presidency.