₦airaland Forum

chukel:
all these you are typing are nonsense. Ihedioha won't even go this way cos he did far terribly worse than this in mbaise. But you won't see that cos you are fraudulently one sided and hypocritically claiming being fair and righteous. You type legibly, so one would expect some sensible reasoning and balance of facts. However, you lack every moral needed to reason sensibly and balance facts. You keep shouting fourth to winner, do you think the courts deliver judgement based on emotions? It was as clear as water that ihedioha rigged the first election. Spread he couldn't get. Yet he was declared. Votes in mbaise clearly surpassed the number of accredited voters, yet they were accepted by inec. If inec claims that the results provided by uzodinmma were fake, why didn't they provide the original one. Oh will they say elections were not held in those polling units? If so why did they declare a winner since elections in those places could upturn the results. That is the way the court goes. Your own bible says you should remove the log in your eyes before even checking the spec in your neighbor's eye.

My man, Ihedioha was the INCUMBENT who had been there 7 months. There is a reason the bar for removing an incumbent is high. Otherwise anybody can connive with INEC or cook up something and no elected official will be safe. Ihedioha didn’t go to court to be declared gov. If he had gone to court with questionable results to be declared gov, the right thing would have been to laugh him out of court because precedents are set with court judgments.

Consider the precedent set here, a person that comes 10th can easily be declared winner and immediately sworn in. All they’d have to do is present result sheets, then the Supreme Court MUST accept them no matter how outrageous and defective they may be, as long as no one can produce the originals!
WOW!!!

The thing is, folks like u seem incapable of seeing the big picture. This is a case that strikes at the very core of what type of country we may end up becoming. YOU DON’T DECIDE SUCH A CASE ON TECHNICALITIES OR BY PRETENDING NOT TO SEE WHAT IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU!

Consider Bush vs. Gore, for example. The Supreme Court could have gone technical, instead they not only thoroughly examined the documents, they ordered a manual recount of the actual original votes!

NO MATTER WHAT, the SC has a duty to make sure that such a momentous, seismic decision has solid, unassailable documentary basis?! They start doing that by thoroughly examining the documents in front of them! This is also their country and they ought care they are setting a precedent that can gradually make their country a one-party state! They are removing a gov and replacing him with a fourth-place finishing appellant based solely on a set of uncollaborated documents supplied solely by the appellant himself. Regardless of what anyone else fails to submit, they have a DUTY to EXAMINE those documents to make sure they are up to par and that the figures therein make sense vis-a-vis number of registered and accredited voters!!

garfield1:
200% turnout? Imo has over 2 millions voters.you are not okay boy

Can u people ever manage to see beyond your immediate short-term advantage?!
YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF FOR SUPPORTING SOMETHING LIKE THIS!

Read the following. Even if u r semi-illiterate u should be able to comprehend it:

“The Guardian obtained a certified-true-copy of the record of the appeal filed at the Supreme Court by Uzodinma and APC... which shows that there were mathematical and factual inconsistencies which the apex court ignored...

For instance, on figure number 69 which shows votes cast at Eziama/Okpala (Umualum Village Square, Eziama), the total number of registered voters was 492, whereas the table shows that the APC scored 819 votes and PDP scored 7 votes, meaning that 334 more votes than the registered voters were recorded, apart from the votes polled by the other candidates at the election that were not shown on the table.

Similarly, on page 22 of the petition referencing polling unit 282, the number of registered voters was put at 591, whereas the tabulation shows that APC polled 586 votes and PDP nine votes, indicating a total of four votes higher than the registered number of voters. This, again, excluded the votes scored by the other candidates.

On the same page 22 of the record, at the polling unit 285 (Obudi/Aro, Central Assembly Square, Unusable 11) with 449 registered voters, APC was credited with 780 votes and PDP with four votes, leaving a total of 335 votes higher than the actual number of registered voters.

Figures obtained from page 79 of the record of appeal under item 384 show that APC scored 526 votes, while PDP was credited with two votes, and the total votes cast was put at 526, indicating two votes higher than the total number registered voters in the area.”[/b]

garfield1:
Nothing will be reversed.atiku made more noise than this

Atiku and Buhari were first and second. None of them came fourth, then SC used documents with 200% voter turn-outs (which INEC swore were fake) to install them in office!

Kuginzi:
The bone of contention is, when it happened in the case of Zamfara, no party protested. But why now?

There is NO COMPARISON between this and Zamfara!
In Zamfara the SC simply affirmed what everybody knew - that APC never held a primary - which was the absolute truth!

Look, bros, I don’t know who these people are and I don’t care one whit about Ihedioha, but this SC judgment goes waaayyyy beyond anything reasonable.

Consider the precedent set, a person that comes 10th can easily be declared winner and immediately sworn in. All they’d have to do is present result sheets, then the Supreme Court MUST accept them no matter how outrageous and defective they may be, as long as no one can produce the originals!
WOW!!!

The thing is, folks like u seem incapable of seeing the big picture. If this were just another case u may be forgiven. But this is a case that strikes at the very core of what type of country we may end up becoming. YOU DON’T DECIDE SUCH A CASE ON TECHNICALITIES OR BY PRETENDING NOT TO SEE WHAT IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU!

Consider Bush vs. Gore, for example. The Supreme Court could have gone technical, instead they not only thoroughly examined the documents, they ordered a manual recount of the actual original votes!

NO MATTER WHAT, the SC has a duty to make sure that such a momentous, seismic decision has solid, unassailable documentary basis?! They start doing that by thoroughly examining the documents in front of them! This is also their country and they ought care they are setting a precedent that can gradually make their country a one-party state! They are removing a gov and replacing him with a fourth-place finishing appellant based solely on a set of uncollaborated documents supplied solely by the appellant himself. Regardless of what anyone else fails to submit, they have a DUTY to EXAMINE those documents to make sure they are up to par and that the figures therein make sense vis-a-vis number of registered and accredited voters!

Confirmedzombie:
PDP and ipobs are too laughable, very useless shameless set of people.

APC should also protest in zamfara state.

Idiots

Kuginzi:
When Zamfara state election was upturned in favour of PDP by supreme Court led by Tanko, no single PDP supporter complained. Now the hired jobless dudes are on the street wasting their precious time. May you guys receive brain. Amen

Why don’t you mention another instance in Nigerian judicial history where the SC ruled against ALL lower courts AND the electoral authority itself in order to immediately replace a sitting governor with a 4th-place finisher - all based on clearly questionable, uncollaborated, and unauthenticated documents supplied solely by the 4th-place finisher himself!!

Don’t even limit it to only Nigeria. Mention any authentic democracy where that has ever happened.

YOU CAN’T! You know why?

Because the bar for removing an incumbent is high otherwise most, including a Buhari, would lose their seats (because anyone can come up with electoral errors or even forge some - as in this case!). It should be nearly impossible to replace a sitting gov with a 4th-place finisher. If at all attempted, the evidence should be CLEAR, ABOVE BOARD, BEYOND REPROACH, FULLY AUTHENTICATED AND WELL COLLABORATED!

Not some childish documents with 200% voter turnouts!

YOU DON’T BASE SUCH MOMENTOUS, SEISMIC DECISIONS ON QUESTIONABLE DOCUMENTS, TECHNICALITIES, AND PRETENDING NOT TO SEE WHAT IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU!!

Understand? Or is that too complicated for u?!

Olominira:
Actually, some of them have died already. Dont trust govt in this area esp superpower nations. It is called pride

None has died, stop lying.
Make google yr friend.
(Remember Iran said 80 were killed!)

Knowing Americans, most of these brain injuries are AUDIO to get a leave to go home!
If u know u know

Miltonbit:
That's a big blow to American troops but I thought the government said no one was injured during the attacked?

Knowing Americans, most of these brain injuries are AUDIO to get a leave to go home!
If u know u know

Champneys:
Ok.

Click “modify” and remove the long article from your quote so people don’t have to scroll through it. Be considerate

Blue3k:
Lol I dont care who wins the case but I'd love to see a runoff election. It would be very entertaining to see what amounts to an overtime game.

I honestly don’t care one whit either. I don’t know who these people are and their names mean absolutely nothing to me. I’d be saying the same exact things if the names were changed to Oluwole and Fashola!

NGpatriot:
Whose job was it to corroborate and authenticate the results submitted by the plaintiff? INEC, but the same INEC did not do so, they did not produce their own authentic results and they did not call any witness, even Ihedioha did not produce his own sets of results or any document at all.

Sorry, blame INEC, Ihedioha and his lawyers instead of crying fowl because they had ample opportunity to prove their case, show their own version of the results and even call witnesses, but they did not. Why? What were they hiding or afraid of?

Bros, just look at what u r supporting in a bid to win a meaningless argument on an anonymous, faceless forum! A clearly horrible judgment that sets dangerous precedent:

A person that came 10th can easily be declared winner and immediately sworn in. All they’d have to do is present result sheets and the Supreme Court MUST accept them no matter how outrageous and defective they may be, as long as no one can produce the originals!
WOW!!!

The thing is, u seem incapable of seeing the big picture. U r all about technicalities and pretending not to see what is actually happening. If this were just another case u may be forgiven. But this is a case strikes at the very core of what type of country we may end up becoming. YOU DON’T DECIDE A CASE LIKE THIS ON TECHNICALITIES OR BY PRETENDING NOT TO SEE WHAT IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU! Consider Bush vs. Gore, for example. The Supreme Court not only thoroughly examined the documents, they ordered a manual recount of the actual original votes!

NO MATTER WHAT, the SC has a duty to make sure that such a momentous, seismic decision has solid, unassailable documentary basis?! They start doing that by thoroughly examining the documents in front of them! This is also their country and they ought care they are setting a precedent that can gradually make their country a one-party state! They are removing a gov and replacing him with a fourth-place finishing appellant based solely on a set of uncollaborated documents supplied solely by the appellant. Regardless of what anyone else fails to submit, they have a DUTY to EXAMINE those documents to make sure they are up to par and that the figures therein make sense vis-a-vis number of registered and accredited voters! That is how it is done! And that is why you don’t have an abundance of judgments like this!

NGpatriot:
I'm begging you, please give one single so called available fact to show that the SC delivered the wrong judgement.
tomdon

Why don’t you mention another instance in Nigerian judicial history where the SC ruled against ALL lower courts AND the electoral authority itself in order to immediately replace a sitting governor with a 4th-place finisher - all based on clearly questionable, uncollaborated, and unauthenticated documents supplied solely by the 4th-place finisher himself!!

Don’t even limit it to only Nigeria. Mention any authentic democracy where that has ever happened.

YOU CAN’T! You know why?

Because the bar for removing an incumbent is placed very high otherwise most, including a Buhari, would lose their seats (because anyone can come up with electoral errors or even forge some - as in this case!). It should be nearly impossible to replace a sitting gov with a 4th-place finisher. If at all attempted, the evidence should be CLEAR, ABOVE BOARD, BEYOND REPROACH, FULLY AUTHENTICATED AND WELL COLLABORATED!

Not some childish documents with 200% voter turnouts!

YOU DON’T BASE SUCH MOMENTOUS, SEISMIC DECISIONS ON QUESTIONABLE DOCUMENTS, TECHNICALITIES, AND PRETENDING NOT TO SEE WHAT IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU!!

Capisce?

adanny01:
I stopped reading at the bolded assuming what follows will be as u reasonable as the bolded.

When you are a party to an election, what you concern yourself is your votes. What concerns you is that your party's votes are entered correctly and transmitted intact to the Ward, LG and state collation centres.

Number of accredited voters is a data that belongs to INEC which is used to checkmate electoral fraud.

When the court asked INEC and Ihedioha's lawyers to prove that the result brought by Uzodinma was fake, they should have raised that point with facts. Bring card readers for such PU's to proof all you are trying to say. But the lawyers didn't provide anything. They didn't provide one single evidence.

You are bring this fact to Nairaland, are those lawyers fools that they didn't bring those facts to the court?

The truth is, what is most important is that fraud was committed with evidence, the defense had no proof that fraud was not committed.

Lastly, the court in judgement adopted the entire results Uzodinma brought since there was no evidence against it. Any inconsistencies with the result is INEC's responsibility. It was proven that a large part of votes were unaccounted for, that is ehat you should focus on.

All your issues are petty and misleading.

If that’s the case then judgments like this should abound:

Mention another instance in Nigerian judicial history where the SC ruled against all lower courts AND INEC itself in order to immediately replace a sitting governor with a 4th-place finisher - all based on clearly questionable, uncollaborated, and unauthenticated documents supplied solely by the 4th-place finisher himself!!

Don’t even limit it to only Nigeria. Mention any authentic democracy where that has ever happened!

Look, there are always errors in elections, that’s why the bar for removing an incumbent needs to be placed very high otherwise most, including a Buhari, would lose their seats (because anyone can come up with electoral errors or forge some - as in this case!). It should be nearly impossible to replace a sitting gov with a 4th-place finisher. If at all attempted, the evidence should be CLEAR, ABOVE BOARD, BEYOND REPROACH, FULLY AUTHENTICATED AND WELL COLLABORATED!
Not some childish documents with 200% turnouts!

YOU DON’T BASE SUCH MOMENTOUS, SEISMIC DECISIONS ON QUESTIONABLE DOCUMENTS!!

Capisce?

garfield1:
You are the one new to it because if you do you will discover that all elections have one error or the other and therefore does it mean that the courts should cancel all the elections? Why didnt pdp raise this issue at the court? Is the any election that is 100% perfect?
The courts work based on facts and evidence not deductions or inference.the evidence which we can see here is that 6 polling units have irregularities and pdp never saw this before.minusing it will change nothing.if you have issues with other units,you simply present documentary or verbal evidences and not hearsays.you are becoming a nuisance herd

Now u r getting close. ALL ELECTIONS HAVE ERRORS. That’s why you have to keep the bar for removing an incumbent very high. Otherwise if u allow anyone who comes up with electoral errors or who forges some (as in this case), no one would keep his seat. That’s why, to replace an incumbent with a 4th-place appellant needs to be just about impossible. Needs to be backed by above board, beyond reproach documentary and otherwise evidence, with multiple layers of authentication.

Capisce?

garfield1:
You are new to the electoral system

Seems like u r the one new to it. Otherwise u wouldn’t have said throw out only the 6 units that have +100%. That is so childish. You should have been able to deduced that all the units have unrealistic turnouts. That ALL the figures are compromised.

Agboriotejoye:
Don't mind the guy. He thinks everyone is like him. The taste of porridge is so sweet in their mouths they're prepared to forego conscience and common sense for it. Imagine asking the SC to reject some parts of a body of evidence and accept others. Chai!!

Not only that, turnout rarely exceeds 60%. That all the units recorded close to 100% turnout or more tells us how those numbers were obtained.
garfield1 try to forget this particular case, focus instead on where the country would end up if this were allowed to continue

garfield1:
Are you sure that your okay or your blind? So because you are going to lose your job as one of ihedioha's agent,does it mean the end of the world for you? Are you unemployable? if you minus the 6 polling units with over voting,will it stop hope from winning your green capped master

We are talking of the trajectory of the country and this one is talking about Ihedioha. Who the hell is Ohedioha?! People are so myopic! Can’t u manage to see beyond just the immediate?!

YOU DON’T MAKE SUCH MOMENTOUS, SEISMIC DECISIONS BASED ON SUCH DOCUMENTS!!

Capisce?

zoedew, bluefilm
allthingsgood, adanny01, Neoteny, Basher8583, Kpoikpoi, Staro
Iamgrey5, Yusman316
berrystunn, HRMK, Yusman316, secureprime, ChoCho54
Jack500, xpmode, alaira
solmusdesigns

This judgment is even worse than thought. Guardian obtained a copy of Uzodinma’s appeal. Read it below. This is the SOLE basis for prompt replacement of a sitting governor with a 4th-place finisher! This is the judgment some people are spending sleepless nights defending as great.
YOU PEOPLE SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES!


“The Guardian obtained a certified-true-copy of the record of the appeal filed at the Supreme Court by Uzodinma and APC... which shows that there were mathematical and factual inconsistencies which the apex court ignored.

In the records tendered at the tribunal, Uzodinma, from pages 9 to 27 of his petition, drew a table of votes allocation which he claimed were the figures obtained from the duplicate copies of Forms EC8A handed over to his party agents at the 388 polling units, the results of which were excluded in the overall result of the election.

From the table he compiled from the 388 polling units, there were 252,452 registered voters, out of which 213,695 voted for APC, and 1,903 voted for Ihedioha.

But the table does not indicate either the total number of accredited voters or the number of invalid votes, if any, and the votes allocated to the remaining 68 candidates that contested the election, aside from Uzodinma and Ihedioha.

Also, the duplicate Forms EC8A tendered by the PW54, Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), Rabiu Hussein, showed that there were no fewer than six polling units where more votes were recorded above the registered number of voters.

For instance, on figure number 69 which shows votes cast at Eziama/Okpala (Umualum Village Square, Eziama), the total number of registered voters was 492, whereas the table shows that the APC scored 819 votes and PDP scored 7 votes, meaning that 334 more votes than the registered voters were recorded, apart from the votes polled by the other candidates at the election that were not shown on the table.

Similarly, on page 22 of the petition referencing polling unit 282, the number of registered voters was put at 591, whereas the tabulation shows that APC polled 586 votes and PDP nine votes, indicating a total of four votes higher than the registered number of voters. This, again, excluded the votes scored by the other candidates.

On the same page 22 of the record, at the polling unit 285 (Obudi/Aro, Central Assembly Square, Unusable 11) with 449 registered voters, APC was credited with 780 votes and PDP with four votes, leaving a total of 335 votes higher than the actual number of registered voters.

Figures obtained from page 79 of the record of appeal under item 384 show that APC scored 526 votes, while PDP was credited with two votes, and the total votes cast was put at 526, indicating two votes higher than the total number registered voters in the area.”

pquaver, garfield1, Blindersoff, Olaolufred, Agboriotejoye

This judgment is even worse than thought. Guardian obtained a copy of Uzodinma’s appeal. Read it below. This is the SOLE basis for prompt replacement of a sitting governor with a 4th-place finisher. This is the judgment some people are spending sleepless nights defending as great.
YOU PEOPLE SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES!


“The Guardian obtained a certified-true-copy of the record of the appeal filed at the Supreme Court by Uzodinma and APC... which shows that there were mathematical and factual inconsistencies which the apex court ignored.

In the records tendered at the tribunal, Uzodinma, from pages 9 to 27 of his petition, drew a table of votes allocation which he claimed were the figures obtained from the duplicate copies of Forms EC8A handed over to his party agents at the 388 polling units, the results of which were excluded in the overall result of the election.

From the table he compiled from the 388 polling units, there were 252,452 registered voters, out of which 213,695 voted for APC, and 1,903 voted for Ihedioha.

But the table does not indicate either the total number of accredited voters or the number of invalid votes, if any, and the votes allocated to the remaining 68 candidates that contested the election, aside from Uzodinma and Ihedioha.

Also, the duplicate Forms EC8A tendered by the PW54, Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), Rabiu Hussein, showed that there were no fewer than six polling units where more votes were recorded above the registered number of voters.

For instance, on figure number 69 which shows votes cast at Eziama/Okpala (Umualum Village Square, Eziama), the total number of registered voters was 492, whereas the table shows that the APC scored 819 votes and PDP scored 7 votes, meaning that 334 more votes than the registered voters were recorded, apart from the votes polled by the other candidates at the election that were not shown on the table.

Similarly, on page 22 of the petition referencing polling unit 282, the number of registered voters was put at 591, whereas the tabulation shows that APC polled 586 votes and PDP nine votes, indicating a total of four votes higher than the registered number of voters. This, again, excluded the votes scored by the other candidates.

On the same page 22 of the record, at the polling unit 285 (Obudi/Aro, Central Assembly Square, Unusable 11) with 449 registered voters, APC was credited with 780 votes and PDP with four votes, leaving a total of 335 votes higher than the actual number of registered voters.

Figures obtained from page 79 of the record of appeal under item 384 show that APC scored 526 votes, while PDP was credited with two votes, and the total votes cast was put at 526, indicating two votes higher than the total number registered voters in the area.”

Agboriotejoye:
That's the point. Most of these APC guys are taking Nigeria along a dangerous slope even PDP never did. The sc in 2007 while agreeing that the election that brought Yar'adua in was faulty, declined to cancel it on the grounds that such decisions were weighty and needed serious incontrovertible proof.
The US is putting their president to trial cause of a phone call, but they recognise the high bar required for making such a decision which is why the impeachment is DOA from scratch.

Of course ihedioha's elections was not perfect. But it does not mean you hand over to another questionable winner just cause of that fact. Accepting a blatantly fraudulent result were some polling units had votes exceeding registered voters, and of which INEC rejected the results due to obvious irregularities, based on some technicalities is making a mockery of INEC and by extension the constitution that empowered it to conduct elections.

Just as in Osun state, the SC has refused to judge a case by its merits but simply some legal jargons. What happened to ordering a retrial?

The fact is the sc is behaving like a bully, removing governors and senators at will but, developing cold feet when it comes to the president or any powerful official for that matter. They have no scruples riding roughshod on election cases just cause they can. Same thing they did when OBJ was president!!

At the end of the day, this particular judgment is legalising rigging as long as you can get INEC to not have their own copy which is easy as ABC. God help this country!!

You said it all.

In conclusion, my challenge stands:

Mention another instance in Nigerian judicial history where the SC ruled against all lower courts AND INEC itself in order to immediately replace a seating governor with a 4th-place finisher - all based on clearly questionable, uncollaborated, and unauthenticated documents supplied solely by the 4th-place finisher himself!!

Don’t even limit it to only Nigeria. Mention any authentic democracy where that has ever happened!

Olaolufred:
I looked at the time I spent answering you.
And discovered it was a wasted time.

I don't want to fall victim of time wasters this year.

You can continue and win your case by yourself.

I congratulate you for winning this case.

I declared you the ssa to Ihedioha.

I declared you as the wisest Nigerian ever.

I declared you everything your ego desire.

Enjoy your day.

And enjoy your gold medal.
Agboriotejoye

To be clear, I am totally unbiased. I neither know nor like Ihedioha nor am I from anywhere near Imo state.

The thing is, u r not looking at the big picture. U r all about technicalities and pretending not to see what is actually happening. If this were just another case u might have a point. The thing is, a case like this is different - it strikes at the very core of what type of country we may end up becoming. This is not a case u decide on technicalities or pretending not to see what is right in front of you. In Bush vs. Gore, for example, Supreme Court not only thoroughly examined the documents, they ordered a recount of the actual original votes!

NO MATTER WHAT, the SC has a duty to make sure that such a momentous, seismic decision has solid, unassailable documentary basis?! They start doing that by thoroughly examining the documents in front of them! This is also their country and they ought care they are setting a precedent that can gradually make it a one-party state! They are removing a gov and replacing him with a fourth-place finishing appellant based solely on a set of uncollaborated documents supplied solely by the appellant. Regardless of what anyone else fails to submit, they have a DUTY to EXAMINE those documents to make sure they are up to par and that the figures therein make sense vis-a-vis number of registered and accredited voters. That, or they are setting a precedent that will gradually slide the country into a one-party state!

garfield1:
I regret replying you big time.is this his you debate? Are you okay ? You are totally impossible.upon all the explanations i have given concerning errors and how the courts work,you are still stubbornly persisting.an sure you are simeone that doesn't listen to useful advice.you are a paid agent of ihedioha.even if all the supreme court justices invite you and explain to you,you wont still agree.dont try this physically please.i pity people around you.shift jor

I am totally unbiased. I neither know nor like Ihedioha nor am I from anywhere near Imo state.
See, if this were just another case u might have a point. A case like this is different - it strikes at the very core of what type of country we’d end up becoming. This is not a case u decide on technicalities or pretending not to see what is right in front of you. In Bush vs. Gore Supreme Court not only thoroughly examined the documents, they ordered a recount of the actual original votes!

NO MATTER WHAT, the SC has a duty to make sure that such a momentous, seismic decision has solid, unassailable documentary basis?! They start doing that by thoroughly examining the documents in front of them! This is also their country and they ought care they are setting a precedent that can gradually make it a one-party state! They are removing a gov and replacing him with a fourth-place finishing appellant based solely on a set of uncollaborated documents supplied solely by the appellant. Regardless of what anyone else fails to submit, they have a DUTY to EXAMINE those documents to make sure they are up to par and that the figures therein make sense vis-a-vis number of registered and accredited voters. That, or they are setting a precedent that will gradually slide the country into a one-party state!

jimmynauty:
a one garty state is not good but do u mean they ignored some doc to come to this judgment? if the sc judment was wrong ihedohia enhanced it by not submitting his form... evidence vs no evkxence worked againt him.

by the way what is the total votes of the 388units uzo won?

They refused to examine any of the documents at all despite obvious defects, neither did they consider that adding the figures therein made for impossible electoral totals.

allthingsgood:
Keep blabbing. Imo has moved on

Look at this one. We are talking of the future of his country and he is stuck on Imo state!

garfield1:
See ajasin vs omoboriowo 1983 per jsc sowemimo.that is a classical example.
Accepted,they were errors therein the documents but the court considered them as minor errors that will not affect the declaration of hope in the long run and i agree.mind you,election results are presumed regular and correct except rebutted and inec failed to do so.our law recognises that they will always be irregularities or errors in our electioneering process that is why it clearly emphasized "substantial non-compliance" and in this case,the non compliance was not substantial.

Now,the supreme court is a review court esp in election cases.they mostly look at what the judges stated about the different evidences presented at the trial and compare it with the law to see if it is in accordance.they dont go deep in examining pieces of evidence one by one,its the job of the tribunal.from the lower court judgment,they didnt fault the result itself or spotted any error in the result sheets.i dont think they even examined the results,they simply used technicalities to dismiss the case.this flimsy excuse were set aside by the apex court and since the lower court found no fault with the result,the apex court followed suit.

Now,to make it easier for you,ill like you to go to inec office and apply to get a copy of filled result sheets and in most of them,you will spot a lot of errors.it is normal except to laymen like you.
In summary,inec and police brought duplicates which had the same figures,inec had none.pdp none and you still expect the apex court to support inec? Mind you whenever there is dispute or discrepancies in results,the tie breaker is the one presented by the police as the court treats it very seriously.
See uchendu vs inec 2018

Are u being intentionally dishonest or is it that u don’t know the details of ”ajasin vs omoboriowo“? In that case SC upheld the lower courts. Not only that, there is hardly a comparison between the two scenarios. Here is a Guardian report (note the bolded):

”On 16th of August, 1983, Akin Omoboriowo was declared winner by the Federal Electoral Commission (FEDECO).

The impact of the declaration was immediate as allegations of vote rigging using “federal might” ensured that violence erupted in various parts of Ondo state. Some reports claimed that the outbreak of violence was the worst in the history of post-independence Yorubaland, exceeding according to at least one newspaper, the “Wet è” riots of the 1960s.

The Oyo Police Commissioner, Umaru Omolowo, who was in charge of security, announced that at least 40 people were killed in Ondo, including two NPN congressional candidates, Olaiya Fagbamigbe and Kunle Agunbiade, who were set ablaze, according to Omolowo, by an angry mob...

The whole thing was challenged in court, and a panel of five judges of the Federal High Court sitting in Akure reversed the election results and awarded victory to Ajasin. The case was appealed by Omoboriowo, and four of the five Court of Appeal judges that sat in Benin City returned a verdict in Ajasin’s favour. At the Supreme Court, only one judge, Ayo Irikefe, dissented, and so Adekunle Ajasin was declared governor of Ondo state for a second term.“

So the challenge stands:

Mention another instance in Nigerian judicial history where the SC ruled against all lower courts AND INEC itself in order to immediately replace a seating governor with a 4th-place finisher - all based on clearly questionable, uncollaborated, and unauthenticated documents supplied solely by the plaintiff himself!!

Don’t even limit it to only Nigeria. Mention any authentic democracy where that happened!

Also here is just a fraction of erros in the documents you say are minor!
*Only APC signed the documents
*Of the 70 parties only APC and PDP results were legible
* Documents were incomplete
* Smudges and alterations

zoedew:
You should have an intellectually rewarding time dissecting and critiquing the judgment in the company of erudite Professors of Law in the Ivory Tower! So long Amigo!

QED
Nice chatting witcha

zoedew:
You are not talking Law Sir! We are talking Law here. Courts do Justice according to Law which overtime has become fairly objective by reason of caselaw precedents and not sentiments which is subjective.

That’s the whole point sir - PRECEDENT.
The SC behavior here is unprecedented - which is why it sets a dangerous precedent all by itself.

Mention another instance in Nigerian judicial history where the SC ruled against all lower courts AND INEC itself in other to immediately replace a seating governor with an appellant- all based on clearly questionable, uncollaborated, and unauthenticated documents supplied solely by the plaintiff himself!!

The DOCUMENTS presented and right in front of the judges were faulty almost to the point of uselessness. Yet they did not see that because they didn’t want to - they refused to examine the documents, the sole basis for their momentous ruling!

jimmynauty:
i blame his lawyers for not defending him...dont they have agents in the listed 388 units to obtain their evidence even if inec fails to give evidence. after the electikn meet your agents collectforms signed and store fkrjudgments like this which ihedioha failed to do

Ordinarily u might have a point. But cases like these are different - they hit at the very core of what type of country we’d end up becoming.

NO MATTER WHAT, the SC has a duty to make sure that such a momentous decision has solid, unassailable documentary basis?! They start doing that by thoroughly examining the documents in front of them! This is also their country and they ought care they are setting a precedent that can gradually make it a one-party state! They are removing a gov and putting in another based solely on a set of documents. Regardless of what anyone else fails to submit, they have a DUTY to EXAMINE those documents to make sure they are up to par and that the figures therein make sense vis-a-vis number of registered and accredited voters. That, or they are setting a precedent that will gradually slide the country into a one-party state!

allthingsgood:
You are just blabbing unnecessary emotional sentiments that are unfounded. The courts don't work with emotional sentiments. Law is law, not what u wish it to be.

Law may be law but cases like this are different. They hit at the very core of what type of country we’d end up becoming.

NO MATTER WHAT, the SC has a duty to make sure that such a momentous decision has solid, unassailable documentary basis?! They start doing that by thoroughly examining the documents in front of them! This is also their country and they ought care they are setting a precedent that can gradually make it a one-party state! They are removing a gov and putting in another based solely on a set of documents. Regardless of what anyone else fails to submit, they have a DUTY to EXAMINE those documents to make sure they are up to par and that the figures therein make sense vis-a-vis number of registered and accredited voters. That, or they are setting a precedent that will gradually slide the country into a one-party state!

zoedew:
You still don’t get it Sir! It is the duty of the Ihedioha and INEC to prove that! Besides, Election Petitions are in a class of their own being cases that have a time frame within which they must be decided. They can’t go on forever. Ihedioha and INEC are bound by their stated cases before the court and it is their duty to prove it.

No sir, u r the one that don’t get it. This case hits at the very core of what type of country we’d end up becoming.

NO MATTER WHAT, the SC has a duty to make sure that such a momentous decision has solid, unassailable documentary basis?! They start doing that by thoroughly examining the documents in front of them! This is also their country and they ought care they are setting a precedent that can gradually make it a one-party state! They are removing a gov and putting in another based solely on a set of documents. Regardless of what anyone else fails to submit, they have a DUTY to EXAMINE those documents to make sure they are up to par and that the figures therein make sense vis-a-vis number of registered and accredited voters. That, or they are setting a precedent that will gradually slide the country into a one-party state!

jimmynauty:
nice summary and enlightenment.

Let’s not forget the big picture! This hits at the very core of what type of country we’d end up becoming!

This is a horrible judgment that sets dangerous precedent. A person that came 10th can easily be declared winner and IMMEDIATELY sworn into office.
All they’d do is present result sheets and the Supreme Court MUST accept them no matter how outrageous and defective they may be, as long as no one can produce the originals!

That is what we are here mindlessly supporting!

Can’t you people see that NO MATTER WHAT the SC has a duty to make sure that such a momentous decision has solid, unassailable documentary basis?! This is also their country and they ought care about it’s future, They have a DUTY to EXAMINE the appellant’s documents and decide wether they are up to par and wether the figures therein make sense vis-a-vis number of registered and accredited voters. That, or they are setting a precedent that will gradually slide the country into a one-party state!

Froshloaded:
I won

I honestly like and admire the intelligence of your comment. That’s why I gave u the like