Osoboshi:
the question I'm asking is can the front loading still be done before it reaches the supreme court for final judgement.by the way ur political argument are mostly right kudos

Frontloading or presentation of evidence only takes place at the trial court not appeal

Kukutenla:

The question is he did not make such pleadings at the tribunal

Even if he pleaded them,bringing them through subpoena is void

Kukutenla:

No. Frontloading simply means to declare upfront the witnesses you intend to call before trial starts.

The problem mostly is that subpoenaed witnesses usually are not willing to come to trial except mandated to by a subpoena. Whether subpoena can be obtained before trial starts though i can't say but I don't think that should be something to throw a substantive case away for if not that the judges are already biased

tnx for the reply.base on your analysis is there any hope of pdp winning the case at supreme court seeing that the apc didn't contest the certified true copies and the rest

Kukutenla:

PDP did not have 30 states in 2007 to 2010. APC stole Edo from PDP in 2008.

Apc stole Edo how? The judgment was impeccable.
As of may 29,2007 pdp had 30 states

That judge shot himself , that man will still loose out .

IfnobeGod20:

No, it is done before pretrial but that suppose not take away justice been served. The judges are just being clever by half by awarding judgement to Sule. Sule should not have benefited from the stolen votes he added to his overall votes.
I read one comment here, that APC did not even pleaded for the expungement of the witnesses discountenance by the Appeal Court. Days to come we will surely hear the fact of this issue. If they didn't pleaded it, then, Appeal Court had scored own goal.

garfield1:


Frontloading or presentation of evidence only takes place at the trial court not appeal

ok,so bye bye to pdp like this even at supreme, Kai

garfield1:


It is a good judgement according to the law.pdp tendered evidence illegally.

Mr. Man expungement of witnesses does not stopped the judges dwelling on the fact of the case as done on Obi's and Atiku's case at the presidential appeal court.
You cannot reward a thief just because it wasn't police that caught him. Remember that justice must be seen to be served before you can say judgement has been delivered.

garfield1:


Apc stole Edo how? The judgment was impeccable.
As of may 29,2007 pdp had 30 states

The judgement is now impeccable. Funny enough Oshiomole actually won that election. I wonder how you lots will feel if he had been denied his mandate based on some funny excuses cooked up by a compromised judiciary.
They had 30 states with some wrongly attributed to them which were rightly given back to the deserved winners. That's my point. So in the eyes of legality, PDP never had 30 states. Simplicita

Osoboshi:
ok,so bye bye to pdp like this even at supreme, Kai

Yes.nothing can be done except political negotiations

Osoboshi:
tnx for the reply.base on your analysis is there any hope of pdp winning the case at supreme court seeing that the apc didn't contest the certified true copies and the rest

Well, based on what has been happening, I'll say no hope. But our courts are like weather. They might get pushed towards overlooking technicalities and render substantive justice. But i won't advice you to hold your breath for it

garfield1:


Even if he pleaded them,bringing them through subpoena is void

Trash. Arrant trash. Bringing them through subpoena should ordinary make no difference if not that the judges are compromised. How does that invalidate the documentary evidence tendered at the tribunal

IfnobeGod20:

I think about 10 of Obi witnesses and about 15 Atiku witnesses were all thrown out because they were not front loaded before the pretrial began.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://punchng.com/breaking-court-rejects-10-out-of-13-witnesses-presented-by-obi/%3Famp&ved=2ahUKEwjMlNq0rNqCAxVBVEEAHRm3BmUQFnoECAoQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3VqdTADjnKz5cIHQs6eKVS



https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://punchng.com/tribunal-rejects-15-witnesses-in-atiku-case-against-tinubu/%3Famp&ved=2ahUKEwjP_Z7crdqCAxUwUUEAHRagAN8QFnoECAsQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3G9f-trmkvqKTP5MxVFnB_

You're butressing my point. Before now, there was no such thing. What is usually done in such case was to give the respondents enough time to look at the statements of teh subpoenaed witnesses and respond. They made it a ground for adjudication in this present round. It's all bullcrap.

Kukutenla:

Okkk. So he won based on not fronloading which he did not plead at the tribunal

It was pleaded at the tribunal but the decision was made before the Supreme Court judgement in Obi+Atiku vs Tinubu and the tribunal accepted the evidence of witnesses that were not front loaded. The Appeal court rightly ruled that the tribunal should not have countenanced the evidences based on the decision of the Supreme Court.

IfnobeGod20:

Mr. Man expungement of witnesses does not stopped the judges dwelling on the fact of the case as done on Obi's and Atiku's case at the presidential appeal court.
You cannot reward a thief just because it wasn't police that caught him. Remember that justice must be seen to be served before you can say judgement has been delivered.

Oga,the evidence giving pdp victory was expunged along the witnesses who presented them.even if they dwell on the merit,it is mere formality as the case is dead..
Justice must be done according to procedures not illegally.besides,apc presented evidences which shows pdp rigged in a number of units but these were neglected amounting to breach of fair hearing

IfnobeGod20:
The fact of the matter doesn't matter to some judges, they are all out for technicality not the fact of the matter. They only give validity to irregularity in calculation that brought Sule in as the winner of the election. What they are trying to say is, if you steal and you're not caught in the act, you're free to enjoy your loot.

Correction Sir. If you were caught by a vigilante and not the police, you're free to go

Kukutenla:

Trash. Arrant trash. Bringing them through subpoena should ordinary make no difference if not that the judges are compromised. How does that invalidate the documentary evidence tendered at the tribunal

Easy son,this is law.documentary evidence were tendered through the subpoenaed witnesses.the position of the law is that once those witnesses are discountenanced,their documents and testimony follow suit

iokpebholo:
Are you from Edo central?Do you know what happened during the last election??

Okpebholo defeated PDP and LP to become the Senator representing Edo central. That is exactly what happened.

Kukutenla:

PDP never had 30 states. More importantly PDP never stole states through the courts

AA Sule won the election and was declared by INEC. He did not win through the court. PDP won Zamfara and Bayelsa through the court in 2019. APGA won Anambra through the court in 2006 and they are still holding on to the state till today. The court is part and parcel of our electoral process so stop trying to denigrate a very important institution because you're not happy with their decision. The duty of the court is to strictly apply the law irrespective of your feelings or emotions.

Kukutenla:

You're butressing my point. Before now, there was no such thing. What is usually done in such case was to give the respondents enough time to look at the statements of teh subpoenaed witnesses and respond. They made it a ground for adjudication in this present round. It's all bullcrap.

The new electoral act made it mandatory for all witnesses to be filed alongside the petition

garfield1:


Oga,the evidence giving pdp victory was expunged along the witnesses who presented them.even if they dwell on the merit,it is mere formality as the case is dead..
Justice must be done according to procedures not illegally.besides,apc presented evidences which shows pdp rigged in a number of units but these were neglected amounting to breach of fair hearing

But the evidence presented shows that APC inflated votes but if PDP inflated their own votes, the appeal court should have added it to their ruling and that will even give more biting teeth to their ruling but that wasn't done.
The Appeal Court in Obi and Atiku's case expunged some witnesses but still went ahead to dwell on the fact of the matter for justice sake. Yes, the witnesses can be illegal but was the evidence illegal? Somebody cannot inflated his overall votes and the judges will just look elsewhere when the evidence before it shows clearly inflated votes. In the worst scenario he should have called for rerun in the affected polling units as to punish both.

garfield1:


Easy son,this is law.documentary evidence were tendered through the subpoenaed witnesses.the position of the law is that once those witnesses are discountenanced,their documents and testimony follow suit

This boy.
Is it not the same EA that says it is not required to produce oral witnesses for documents tendered as evidence or what are you saying? You are applying a principle that was already removed by the new law. Same new law that you claimed they are relying upon. The documentary evidences can stand on its own. That's what EA2022 says.

IfnobeGod20:
But the evidence presented shows that APC inflated votes but if PDP inflated their own votes, the appeal court should have added it to their ruling and that will even give more biting teeth to their ruling but that wasn't done.
The Appeal Court in Obi and Atiku's case expunged some witnesses but still went ahead to dwell on the fact of the matter for justice sake. Yes, the witnesses can be illegal but was the evidence illegal? Somebody cannot inflated his overall votes and the judges will just look elsewhere when the evidence before it shows clearly inflated votes. In the worst scenario he should have called for rerun in the affected polling units as to punish both.

The tribunal already considered the merit already but I'll go with the minority ruling.there was inflation in lafia but no overvoting was proved by pdp.some places pdp won were fraught with overvoting.apc won by 2000

Afamed:


Re run for an established case of illegal votes and not being a member of a political party?

Una go just open mouth waaaa

Shut up. Whose fault was it when the ballot papers were not stamped and signed? Why should the electorates be punished for INEC's mistake? I'm not an errand boy like you. Bleep off

seunmsg:


AA Sule won the election and was declared by INEC. He did not win through the court. PDP won Zamfara and Bayelsa through the court in 2019. APGA won Anambra through the court in 2006 and they are still holding on to the state till today. The court is part and parcel of our electoral process so stop trying to denigrate a very important institution because you're not happy with their decision. The duty of the court is to strictly apply the law irrespective of your feelings or emotions.

AA Sule never won. Even he is aware he did not win. That is why he went the religious route after the tribunal did substantive justice. The EA gives tribunals the latitude to inspect documents tendered before it of themselves without need for oral witnesses to explain them.
PDP did not win Zamfara through the courts. It is not the fault of PDP that APC was divided against itself and took itself to court. PDP was just a beneficiary of an implosion.
As for Bayelsa, the judgement was ridiculous. Such does not exist that a validly elected man should suffer for the sin of another in our laws. It was simply a fightback for the heist that took place in Imo where fourth came first. Funny enough APC e-rats have been accusing a certain individual of trying to come first from third when they actually came first from fourth after their substantive candidate had been disqualified.
APGA won based on the substantive results of the election and not some technicalities.
How come it is always APC that benefits from technicalities?? You should be ashamed.

garfield1:


The new electoral act made it mandatory for all witnesses to be filed alongside the petition

Where?

Kukutenla:
This boy.
Is it not the same EA that says it is not required to produce oral witnesses for documents tendered as evidence or what are you saying? You are applying a principle that was already removed by the new law. Same new law that you claimed they are relying upon. The documentary evidences can stand on its own. That's what EA2022 says.

It is not required if it shows manifest irregularities in theory,for someone must interpret it practically.it is settled law that only the makers of a document is competent to testify.if you tender any document without demonstrating it,it is termed dumping.

garfield1:


They did

they didn't win....they lost kaduna and nassarawa. Forget politics make we dey talk true sometimes. It was so glaring that day infact they know they lost woefully,Apc was hard hit especially in kaduna state governorship election. Don't bother to argue it.

garfield1:


There can't be rerun as there was illegal voting.a rerun can only suffice if the election wasn't concluded or there was none

What makes the voting illegal? I guess INEC officials failure to stamp and sign the ballot papers made it so abi? For justice sake, INEC has to correct it mistake and conduct election in those areas.

Kukutenla:
Where?

Paragraph 4(5) of the first schedule EA2022

Triplerg:
What makes the voting illegal? I guess INEC officials failure to stamp and sign the ballot papers made it so abi? For justice sake, INEC has to correct it mistake and conduct election in those areas.

Elections can be reconducted if there was no election there mr.once there is overvoting,otilo

Bizibi:
they didn't win....they lost kaduna and nassarawa. Forget politics make we dey talk true sometimes.

The evidences here showed that apc won the two states.i can concede nasarawa but pdp never proved that they won kaduna

seunmsg:


AA Sule won the election and was declared by INEC. He did not win through the court. PDP won Zamfara and Bayelsa through the court in 2019. APGA won Anambra through the court in 2006 and they are still holding on to the state till today. The court is part and parcel of our electoral process so stop trying to denigrate a very important institution because you're not happy with their decision. The duty of the court is to strictly apply the law irrespective of your feelings or emotions.

But Sule did not win the election by popular vote, he inflated his votes in some polling units which were presented in the court but same court overlooked them just because the witness that presented them were not front loaded. The question now is, should Sule benefit heavily from stolen votes if truly justice is to be served?
If you go through the ruling on the case of Obi and Atiku at the Appeal Court, the judge still dwell on the fact o the matter after expunging the witnesses not front loaded. While was this one different? In every sound judgement justice must be seen served but on this one was justice served?
The courts and judges are the one denigrating themselves by their inconsistent judgements and awarding judgement to undeserving people like Lawan, Umahi and Akpabio. These three people never participated in Senatorial Primary but our almighty supreme court awarded them free tickets and you expect people to have faith in courts.
Also, how would one judgement says one thing and another one says another thing on similar cases of sponsorship and nomination. They just open themselves to ridicule.
Besides, the issue in discourse between garfield1 and kukutenla was on the number of PDP governors during PDP era and not on the argument you're bringing here.