₦airaland Forum

43Ronin:
Olietan, shes not married and she's not from a wealthy family. she's just servicing the yoruba man there that's her boss just like all yoruba managers service their female secretaries. she's living above her means and the police should have responded that an investigation would be carried out(even though they wont) the cup of illegality will soon full in this country.

PrinceOfLagos:
Her surname is "David"

IAMBOSS1990:
Exactly my thoughts, besides being married to a rich man or coming from a wealthy home, being Secretary to the IGP alone opens many financial doors for her.

Wahabfuture:
Can you kindly show us Tinubu primary school certificate or WAEC ? Agbadorians are the most brainless people on this earth, they all think and move like Agutos

PrinceOfLagos:
It's either she's from a well to do home or she's a cunt to the Ogas at the top.

Her salary alone can't buy her Samsung fold and luxury wrist watch

BJanta:
GOD bless you, amen.

ROGUEmerica:
You go explain taya

The president of the Int'l Criminal Cult remains wanted.

ElSudani:
"Judge Nancy Maldonaldo will only rule whether she would grant partial release of Tinubu transcript or academic records without jeopardizing the privacy laws in the US which states that students academic records cannot be released to anyone without the students consent."

One angry Obidients wanted to slap me when I told him about the privacy Act. He didn't believe there's anything like that. SMH.

VikingKing:
Will you please shut up! Tinubu is a public servant who is currently living la vida loca with taxpayers money. All this is afforded to him by the office which he now occupies. An office that has sacrosanct educational requirements.

How are we being told that we should ignore the fact that NOBODY knows the secondary and primary schools Tinubu attended because his admission at CSU covers that. And when we then turn to ask for his academic records at CSU we're being told to respect his privacy? Are you people maddddd?

Xscape1993:
Go and learn more on how to write impartial write ups. Good day.

CandidAdmin:
Can you please explain in details what happened for us wey no get data

jahsharon:
The people you are talking to are 10th Class citizens in Nigeria.

I expect them to write INEC to inform INEC that the Presidential Election is supposed to be conducted in Abuja only because Abuja is superior to all other states

Okoroawusa:
Ellu Pee....some people were thumb printing anything on that election day even if na goat dem no care.

ItisWell22:
Wahala!

At this pace, e be like sey them go soon sack Alex Otti.

kereman1:
Pls highlight them pls.

Deco7:
Smh. Bigotry has finished the youths. And.Tinubu deserves to be in power forgetting the law is fully clear about 25% in FCT

Deco7:
If it were an Igbo that won the predincy and was doing this to Yoruba groups like lawmakers to traditional rulers, how would the Yoruba people feel. Let's remember,no one would be on stage forever. Kano is about to be set on fire because of cultist interests of people close to their graves wanting to drag innocent young lives to the grave. The PDP was never this mischievous. Never

The Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Lagos has declared Rauf Olawale Sulaiman of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the winner of the State House of Assembly, Amuwo-Odofin II Constituency election held on March 18, 2023.

The tribunal court sitting at the Tafawa Balewa Square (TBS), while delivering judgment, ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to present Sulaiman with the certificate of return as the winner of the election.

The court held that the Electoral Act 2022 does not allow a candidate to be declared winner if the candidate did not fully participate in the election process.

The court held that the Labour Party candidate (LP), Olukayode Doherty, that was issued certificate by the INEC did not appear on the ballot, noting that Tunde Fashina, who appeared on the ballot and got the majority of votes, was not qualified to contest.

The APC candidate had filed the petition against INEC, Labour Party, Tunde Fashina and Olukayode David Doherty as the first to fourth respondents respectively.

The INEC had presented the certificate of return for the Amuwo-Odofin Constituency II to the fourth respondent, Doherty.

While delivering judgement, the three-man panel, headed by Justice Ashu Ewah, held that Doherty did not appear on the ballot and that the LP candidate, Fashina, who appeared on the ballot and got the majority votes was not qualified to contest.

Justices Abdullahi Ozegya and M. A. Sambo, who are members of the tribunal, declared INEC’s presentation of certificate of return to Doherty null and void.

The tribunal, in its unanimous decision, overturned the INEC result after considering the evidence presented by the petitioners and the respondents.

The tribunal held that the petitioners filed to disqualify Fashina for not presenting the minimum academic qualification to contest the office, and also that his candidacy was not sponsored by the LP, and he did not win the number of majority votes in the polls held on March 18, 2023.

The tribunal ruled that the second and third respondents, LP and Fashina, failed to provide an academic certificate to prove the LP candidate met the minimum academic requirement of a First School Leaving Certificate or its equivalent.

As a result, the tribunal held that “It is determined that all the votes recorded for the second and third respondents in House of Assembly, Amuwo-Odofin Constituency II election are wasted votes, invalid and void on the grounds of the non-qualification to participate in the election.”

However, the tribunal struck out the APC and Sulaiman’s ground of petition that the LP and its supported candidate, Doherty did not win the highest number of votes, for not sufficiently proving the claim.

The petitioner counsel, Mr. James Ogunyemi had presented 22 witnesses during trial and in his final written address raised five issues for determination before the tribunal but respondents called four witnesses.

Ogunyemi prayed the tribunal to determine whether Fashina was qualified to contest, having not participated in all the sections of the election before March 18 polls.

The petitioner also argued that INEC gave the certificate of return to another LP member, Doherty, who did not participate in the election.

The tribunal, therefore, held that the second respondent (LP), admitted to fact that the fourth respondent, Doherty not participating in the elections, and truly fielding the third respondent, Fashina, and thus needed no further evidence.

“The Electoral Act 2022 does not allow for a candidate to be declared winner if the candidate did not fully participate in the election process,” the tribunal ruled.

According to the tribunal, counsel to the second respondent, told the court that the LP made a decision to swap Fashina with Doherty in accordance with the “judgment in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2115/2022 and the decision of the Court of Appeal in Suit No. A/ABJ/CV/253/2022.”

The tribunal said it disagreed with the second respondent, as the Appeal Court decision it cited did not authorise for a swap or replacement of candidates, but directed the first respondent, INEC, to open its website and allow political parties to submit their candidate for the purpose of the general election.