₦airaland Forum

RichDad1:
Arise is the home of fake news. Zero integrity.

Evil man, why must you show off that beautiful stand and lovely elephant!

tuoyoojo:
It is nauseating putting it in its mildest form that INEC after collecting over 300 billion Naira did not think that what ever be the outcome of the elections, litigations would follow and the bvas machine would be the bone of contention

Still having the above in mind, they by themselves fixed 2 weeks after presidential elections to hold gubernatorial elections

Now they are trying to threaten Nigerians that they would postpone elections. Let them postpone it o....heaven will not fall



This there actions reeks of two things

Either they were not well prepared for the elections or they are desperately trying to cover their tracks because this is the most glaring rigging in the history of rigging in Nigeria

The annoying aspect for me is that it will surely have a knock on effect on the time it will take to resolve the naira scarcity problem.

tomju2:
Defamation is actually a dual offence. It can be civil or criminal. It depends. Read citation here.
https://www.abuad.edu.ng/when-false-publications-may-amount-to-criminal-libel/#:~:text=DEFAMATION%20CAN%20BE%20CIVIL%20AND%20CRIMINAL&text=This%20is%20what%20is%20called,%2C%20prosecuted%2C%20convicted%20and%20sentenced.

My view is that the criminal laws against it are void to the extent of their inconsistency with S.39(1) of the 1999 Constitution:

"Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and receive and impart ideas and information without interference."

DennisEche:
Ogun go kill you for misleading the people
CRIMINAL DEFAMATION UNDER THE NIGERIAN LAW
A defamation matter is defined in section 373 of the criminal code as a matter likely to injure the reputation of any person by exposing the person to hatred, contempt or ridicule, or likely to damage any person in his or her profession or trade by injury to his reputation

It is unconstitutional and void on account of being inconsistent with S. 39 of the Constitution.

DennisEche:
The Cybercrime (prohibition, prevention) Act 2015
that became effective on May 15, 2015 also provides as follows: 'any person who knowingly sends a message or other matter by means of computer systems or that he knows to be false, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, ill will or needless anxiety to another or causes such a message to be sent commits an offence under this Act and shall be liable on conviction for a fine of not more than?7,000,000.00 or imprisonment for a term of not more than three years or to both such fine and imprisonment"
You are the biggest edoit

There is a lot in the interpretation of statutes that you may not be aware of, and I certainly don't know if you are aware of the rules of interpretation of statutes - the literal, mischief and golden rules, to be specific. For me, the golden rule should be useful here because reading these words literarily can lead to absurdity.

In this regard, the words I have highlighted within S 24(b) of the cited Act in the above are cardinal because the person making the said statement will have to be shown to know the statement to be false - and this is cardinal because the person making the statement complained of will simply say that he believed his statement to be true. It is key that you understand the words used above because this is not just a case of showing that the statement made is false, one would also have to show that the maker knew it was false and this is something very hard to to show at all events.

The second point I will make is that the constitutionality of this provision is very debatable and I would like to see a day when that very constitutionality is tested in court, because while I can understand the provisions which talk about threats, pornography, xenophobia and the like, I certainly cannot understand a provision which is drafted so broadly as to include something as ordinary as "causing annoyance, inconvenience . . . insult. . . enmity. . . hatred... ill will. . . or anxiety" to another person. Firstly, this could easily capture almost any piece of ordinary communication among people and even among family members who have any kind of disagreement. Secondly this is too much of a stretch and would appear to me to trample on constitutional rights to freedom of speech and expression (guaranteed under Cap 4/ S 39 of the 1999 Constitution) - and therefore is void to the extent of its inconsistency as provided for in S1(3) of the 1999 Constitution .

It is also important to bear in mind that many subjective statements could fall under a broad construction of these words and thus this renders this provision extremely questionable.

Therefore please note that the person alleging a wrong has been done has to show two things -

1. That the information provided is false (If it is true, there is no case at all)
2. That even if it is false, the maker of the statement also knew it was false.

However, I hope you can see that the law cannot so easily be invoked to clamp a person into prison simply for saying something which another person does not like.

In closing, I give you kudos for citing something - many are far too lazy to do so at all. Well done.

correctguy101:
What do you expect?

The average Nigerian knows not the difference.

Also, with the kind of judiciary we have in this country, it will be a real hassle to challenge someone of the eediot governor's standing.

Like someone rightly said: POWER IS POWER

Sadly, thats the truth oh.

DennisEche:
Just de mumu yourself.

Typical response from an ignoramus.
Cite the criminal code or sharrap.

dedonfranco:
Knowledge is not power........power is power.

Cersei?

accordadoga:
DEFAMATION IS A CRIME

No Madam, it is not.
Otherwise please cite me the section of the Criminal Code that renders it a crime.

When will this nonsense stop? Why is defamation / slander / libel being criminalized by the powerful in Nigeria? These are civil wrongs for which one can be sued, not crimes for which one is to be prosecuted. This really needs to stop!

Nelz7:
Yeah Obidients supported d policy and we re glad we did. Else via vote buying, Tinubu would hv won convincingly not this inec brouhaha that will fail before any court.

So you were willing to accept the death of many, the crippling of the economy and the untold hardship endured (and still being endured) by millions of people, in a bid to have your candidate win the election?

There was once a president in this country, a gentleman, perhaps too much a gentleman, who said that his ambition is not worth the blood of any Nigerian.

Evidently you don't feel the same way.

Fahdiga:
In any form whatever.

"Also, the National Publicity Secretary of the Labour Party, Dr Yunusa Tanko said, “We are not surprised that those at the forefront of cash and carry politics, who are used to deploying bullion vans for election purposes are the ones complaining about this laudable government policy targeted at curbing inflation. Look at the inflation figures today, inflation numbers are coming down. The CBN must not back down, the bank should insist on the January 31st date to prevent a situation where those who have stashed billions in their closet with the aim of buying votes will be denied that opportunity. “

https://www.vanguardngr.com/2023/01/naira-redesign-opposition-parties-urge-cbn-not-to-bow-to-pressure/

Above was the publicly communicated stance of the Labour Party.

However, I have no doubt that you will seek to dismiss even this. You will probably say that it does not represent Obidients - even when they were everywhere online and offline supporting the policy. It is well. I will not go on your fool's errand much more, for it is indeed a fool's errand you have presented me with. You can keep playing the ostrich. Everyone know's the truth. Its what has transpired in the last few weeks - not a millennium ago. You can't so easily and so quickly re-write history.

Fahdiga:
Evidence bro.

May I ask what form this evidence should take?

FlipModeSquade:
Nobody can kick him out,until his tenure is over,get that into whatever you call a brain..

A President can kick a CBN Governor out anyday anytime.
Reference: GEJ V SLS.

Fahdiga:
Provide evidence that Obidients supported the obnoxious policy.

This is like asking me to provide evidence that corruption thrives in Nigeria. Its a notorious fact, it was everywhere online and offline. Virtually all those supporting Obi who I know in my personal life supported the policy and did so for the exact reason that they thought it would stop vote buying. The same was the case online. You cant reasonably ask me to provide evidence of something that millions of people were saying online and offline at the same time - because that will mean I will have to cite millions of quotes. And no one can do that. And you know no one can do that, thats why you are hiding behind that. So even if I come up with ten quotes, or for the sake of argument, a hundred quotes, you would still easily say thats just a few people's personal opinion.

Everyone knows the truth - this reckless policy was massively supported by Obidients.

Fahdiga:
Provide evidence.

I dont know about you personally, but it is on record and undeniable that Obidients massively supported the policy with the view that it would hobble and scupper the chances of the Bullion Baboon of Bourdillon and his Billions.

Trustme2:
So one can take more than 20k per day in the banking hall now ?

I dont know. The silence from the accursed duo of Buhari and Emefiele is deafening.

Trustme2:
That's not the issue. The real issue is the withdrawal limit

The SC also said the withdrawal limit is illegal.

SisterFire:
... You just gave us the description of yourself. The way u figure this out shows u are familiar with this broke entity.

Where's your sense of humor?

Flamemignon1:
Did you even read the part where I said it was a playful and open competition between adults and kids? Other adult women participated too. The 13 year old girl even won back in 2021 over other adult women that participated

I watched an interview with the trans-woman, I did not just read an article. The trans woman expressed his views firmly that the fact that he was biologically male and much older had no relevance to the result - and he was convinced about this, insisting that it was all about "determination."

Secondly, regardless if this was "playful" or not as you claim, there are perfectly serious competitions where trans women fraudulently and disgracefully take advantage like this, and it has become a serious issue which threatens female sports.

Flamemignon1:
Trans men exists in male sports too, transwomen are only attacked and mostly in the media because as per usual,they are under more scrutiny.
Furthermore,did you even read the article about about the 29 year old that competed against a 13 year old or you just took offence because of the age difference and gender transition? It was an open competition between adult and kids and whether trans or not,as an adult,Ricci Tres would've still won

Hang on a second, lets even leave the trans thing for one second, you think it was ok for a 29 year old to compete with children who are 11 - 13 years old?

Flamemignon1:
It's funny how the patriarchy continues to bring up the bolded to attack women but you never see them doing the same for transmen.

One thing to note is that you will be hard pressed to find a trans man (a woman who claims to be a man) going to seek to compete in male sports. Evidence of just how cowardly and fraudulent this is rests in the fact that it is nearly always the other way round - trans women (men who claim to be women) who go to compete in women's sports. Because they know they have an obvious and fraudulent advantage therein.

This morning I saw a case of a 29 year old trans woman who went to compete against 11 - 12 year old girls in a competition.
That sickening.

tammie24:
[i][/i]1 is even enough

Let him mention

He can't. Just cowardly, lazy talk fueled by his own passions.

Vickho:
my colleague openly told me she loves lesbians but she's scared to come out open as a lesbian.
she fantasizes lesbians but always shy to open up her sexuality.
Can I connect you with her?

Best be circumspect about everything you see/ read on an anonymous platform. SisterFire might just be an ageing fat hairy bloke who walks with a limp, burps and farts very loudly, is in the habit of picking his nose and biting his nails and types out of a face-me-i-slap-you in the depths of Oyigbo or Ajegunle, while borrowing his neighbor's phone to do so and carefully eluding the officials from the Federal Neuro Psychiatric Hospital, Yaba, who routinely visit his neighborhood in a bid to capture him.

Flamemignon1:
Girl,same thing. This world is largely heteronormative but you don't see queer folks clamoring to bring it down

Oh, but they do. There is a huge furore in the western world about gender pronouns, the use of female bathrooms by trans women (men who claim to be women) and the participation of trans women (men who claim to be women) in female sports. In many ways the LGBTQ world is stampeding the mainstream world into strange and bizarre norms which in many cases make no sense whatsoever - such as insisting that even children as young as 4 or 5 years old can "self-identify" as a different gender from that which they biologically are.

So do not claim that queer folks are simply sitting peacefully alone while being targeted: the truth is that the queer community is actively stampeding its norms down everyone's throats and attacking anyone who disagrees as some sort of prejudiced freak who can then be isolated or "cancelled."

It is so bad that in some places one can no longer use simple words such as "boy" or "girl" in a school or a word such as "woman."

Flamemignon1:
You really think homophobia is only just a fear or hate of queers? Think again

Thats what it essentially is, intertwined with the prejudice, aversion and denial of rights that spring therefrom. Otherwise please tell me what it is, enlighten me. Try not to refer me to Google please. Thank you.

Ishilove:
I'm not homophobic. I'm just allergic to having this LGBT bullshit shoved down my throat

Anyone who questions his ludicrous claim is automatically a homophobe.

It is just pathetic. Reminiscent of those trans people who would brand anyone who disagrees with the notion that there is no such thing as biological gender as transphobic.

Ishilove:
Don't expect anything reasonable from those lots. They'll say almost anything to defend their perversion

Wahallahi

Kodak9:
you get time to dey argue with that f.aggot

He can enjoy his faggottery for all I care, my interest was simply in the attempt to appropriate science with the false claim that there are up to 1500 species that practice homosexuality. That is the extent to which the sufferer's perversity can lead him to try to cook up false science.

AndroidAI:
It's a waste of my time proving to a homophobe, who might as well be a homosexual struggling with internalised homophobia.

As usual. The old lame line of projecting your inadequacies onto others.
I suffer no such problem as you do.

Good luck with your delusions.

Glitcher:
The nudist use animals as reference which is exactly what I'm against. You can call yourself an animal just because a bunch of people told you you are one but I'm not one. No animal has the creative ability like us so none should be in same class as us. Not every living thing is a plant or animal, we may have flesh and blood like them but we are not. Hundreds of years from now that analogy will be corrected. We are moral beings, ethical by nature, when these moral and ethical boundaries are destroyed then we will become animals. A few have done that however it should not be accepted as the norm. You argue in support of homosexuality because its legal and normal in some countries, those countries have spread their culture through the media-movies and you have become influenced. Even though it is normal in some societies it isn't right, what is normal is not necessarily right.

Please don't put words into my mouth - it appears you have not followed this thread - I have NOT argued in support of homosexuality, if anything, I could be said by most to be arguing the reverse.

As far as I am concerned any adult is free to do what he or she pleases sexually with any other consenting adult: my view is simply that homosexuality is unnatural.

AndroidAI:
Should I confirm your statement, I will find out it's wrong upon research.

This is nothing short of confirmation bias, if you know what that is.

Even if I list the 1500 species, wouldn't you verify?

You presume too much. You neither know me nor know how deeply or seriously I may have already researched this subject. You are just walking around in ludicrous circles. You make a presumptuous statement which you cannot prove, and you ask others to go on a research errand. That's iidiotic.

1. He who asserts must prove.
2. Anything that can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without eveidence.
3. There are 50, 000 species which practice necrophilia. Go to Google.

Olodo.

Its you who has been rendered daft simply on account of your passion for assholes.