₦airaland Forum

GHANA|

loloadannke:
Pastor Taribo shock me sha What money cannot do does not exist.

I saw him praying "fervently"

N

Farooq Kperogi

FOR HOW MUCH ?

YOU ARE THE ONE USING RELIGION HERE

Money. The power of money

so he said this in the pic?

We are watching. Politics is not religion, beware of people who want to use religion to divide people.

TollMind:
I see you loosing your bet

I don't bet

Liverpool epl , city FA

Use mummy

bigfoot79:
The problem is domiciled in your preceptory apparatus, a visit to a GP may point you in the right direction; whether na walking sticks abi na Bam bi Allah

what is a GP?

Without any contraction, Osinbajo is the next president of Nigeria

IfnobeGod20:
You people would just want to talk for talking sake. Le time first correct you on the usage of the word "bill" instead of 'act'. Amendment that has been assented to is no more bill but act. There, it shows your level of understanding.
Now to the main subject, constitution doesn't take authority from an act. It's an act that take authority from the constitution. Any act that doesn't take precedence from the constitution is void, no matter how laudable it may look like. Act works and takes root on the frame work of the Nigerian constitution. Meaning, it must be consistent with the letter of the constitution.

so acts don't become constitutions?

Yes I agree it's no more a bill,

I see arsenal losing

Congratulations to him. I hope he won't be a yahoo-yahoo governor

drlateef:
You didn’t put it clearly. The section in 99 constitution only talks about resignation from position. While the new legislation talks about participation, not resignation. They are two different things. You see these National Assembly guys are smart. They carefully avoided terms used in current constitution so as not to collide with the constitution. That section of constitution does not make it compulsory for appointees to participate, while the new legislation makes it compulsory for them not to participate. And this is allowed in law because INEC staff cannot also participate in election. So therefore, political appointees will not be the first to be disenfranchised from such special election of the primaries in parties. They are not disenfranchised from national elections like everyone. Even some categories of Nigerians can still be disenfranchised from national elections, examples include prisoners and security operatives including INEC staff.

the new law also talked about resignation, for appointees to participate
or be voted for in convensions, they need to resign first

Curtisaxel10:
I have lived in the Southeast for basically all my life so I know almost nothing about life in the north.

I need advice on the state of security in Kano and any other things I should know about the state and society. Thanks.

I take God beg you, redeploy

Anyadike ruled that sections 66(1)(f), 107(1)(f), 137(1)(f) and 182(1)(f) of the 1999 constitution already stipulated that appointees of government seeking to contest elections were only to resign at least 30 days to the date of the election.

The judge said any other law that mandated such appointees to resign or leave office at any time before that was unconstitutional.

President Muhammadu Buhari had assented to the electoral act amendment bill on February 25.

He, however, asked the national assembly to expunge section 84 (12) of the act, which reads: “No political appointee at any level shall be a voting delegate or be voted for at the convention or congress of any political party for the purpose of the nomination of candidates for any election.”

MY TAKE


The Judge is wrong and cannot correctly interpret the law.


The newly passed bill strenthens the 1999 constitution. Because if "no political appointee has to resign before congress or convention of any political party, then such person cannot violate "any political appointee seeking a political position should resign at least 30 days to the date of the election"

Buhari is not aware

What power then does the national assembly have? Does that mean a political appointee has more power than the whole of the national assembly?


I consider this judgement a yahoo-yahoo type

i will take my time to go through this

sammy7410:
Am coming
Let me check something

unfair

inconclusive

DarkJeddi:
Not if it conflicts with the constitution..
It can be declared null and ultra vies..

Are you a lawyer?

Are you a lawyer?

Themandator:
Courts Do have the power to declare a law illegal. It is one of the ways to amend a law.


As for this law the national assembly cannot amend or delete anything from the act without causing problem for the 2023 election because the condition says any law relating to our election must be in place a year to the election date and another law says the elections must hold some specific period before the actual swearing in date of May 29



If they amend as the president demands and he signs, it becomes a new law affecting those two dates thereby making the entire election illegal



If Buhari signed the law when it was first presented and sent his objection to section 84 they would have had the time to delete it and return for his assent, right now it is no longer possible except by the court which can declare that section illegal without the need for the president to sign anything

Honestly, I saw the same thing

Courts do not have power over bills ,

If Ahmed Lawan says he is with you, my brother, he is not with you.




OSINBAJO 2023

o

O

Ok

Akande is old. Omisore cannot be trusted