₦airaland Forum

Bobby4090:
Are there no christians in the North? they are fully qualified to be CAN president.
Afterall Bishop Oyedepo is from the North, Kwara state. Is he not also qaulified to be CAN president? why are some southern eedeeots bringing disunity in christiandom, why?

UrennaNkoli:
Buhari's actions was for a more justified reason and it was necessary for the benefit of the nation. This of Mr wike is just ridiculous and it is nothing but an epitome of hate, disgust, frustration and revenge.

Fawklicant:
Of course he is partisan, he is the new Lie mohammed.

Justice Abdul Northerner who read the lead judgment, said......

TGM2015:
Thank you, we on the same page. I'm only telling the quoted moniker that the so call SR that he/she is referring to a making propaganda investigations (against PDP governors) is the same news agency that is exposing FG budget of fraud (APC president).

Bigchief46:
Sagay was my Dean at the University of Benin and as a student was beloved by all of us, but I have to say that his comments on litigation matters have always been a terrible disappointment. It was the same way he tarnished his reputation with his comments on the Abia Guber poll Election Petition Tribunal Judgment in 2007. Sagay's problem is however very clear to understand; he is a distinguished Law teacher no doubt but he is no Barrister. There is a world of difference between theory and practice. Sagay was a law Teacher for the majority of his Professional working life, rising to become a distinguished Professor of Law specializing in Contracts. At a very late stage in his professional life, he decided to try his hands in private Legal Practice but his record in Litigation has been filled with blunder after blunder: there is a reason that the proverb says that you don't learn new tricks in old age. SAGAY IS NO LITIGATOR simple and should stop embarrassing himself by giving myopic opinions on litigation matters. He was awarded a SAN ENTIRELY for his academic accomplishments & not for anything he has ever done in the Court room. Moreover, I do not know of a single Election Petition in which SAGAY has been Lead Counsel. Election Petitions is a highly technical practice Area and many lawyers, including SANs reject such Briefs or recommend others if approached. Most Politicians know those who are experts in this exclusive area of practice & Sagay is certainly not one of them. The first Rule in critique of Judgments is that you must have all the facts of a case so that you know exactly what the Court you are criticizing knows. Moreover in these cases, the Supreme Court has not even given its reasons for the Judgments so people of the standing of SAGAY should have been slow to make such disparaging comments on our APEX Court for now. It would be understandable if this was some green-wig lawyer or rabble-rousing "radical" lawyer making these comments. NOW TO THE ISSUE: I have some suspicions as to why almost all the Governorship cases will end up this way. First, the Supreme Court is consistently known and revered for its CONSISTENCY over the years. With the SC, you know exactly what the law is unlike the Courts of Appeal who keep on putting their foot in their mouth and somersaulting all the time. Most Petitioners in this election circle took the easy way out by relying & putting the fate of their Petitions on Card Readers. The traditional way of prosecuting & proving electoral malpractices is very difficult & so when the issue of Card Readers came up, they shouted "eureka" & focused all their energies on proving malpractices using Card Reader data. Even those who pleaded other forms of malpractices & non-compliance failed to call adequate evidence on them as proving malpractices through Card Reader data appeared simpler & straight forward. But they did not take cognizance of one thing: Card Reader as part of the accreditation process IS NOT YET part of our Electoral Laws. Card Reader is commendable; it will reduce rigging; it will improve transparency in the electoral process BUT IT IS NOT PART OF THE LAW YET: you cannot put something on nothing. The fault for this lacuna should not be put on the doorsteps of the SC but is entirely that of INEC. INEC failed to get accreditation by Card Reader legislated into law before the elections. The duty of any Court, including the SC is to interpret the law: in doing so, a Court should interpret the law AS IT IS and not AS IT OUGHT TO BE. This forum is not adequate to expantiate on this issue but let me finalize by saying this: the mode of accreditation recognized by the Electoral Act is as set out at Section 49 of the Act. Once the data & details of a prospective voter appears in the Voter's Register & match that in his PVC, he should be given a ballot paper and allowed to vote. There is no mention of Card Reader anywhere in the Electoral Act & so INEC Presiding Officers were giving ballot papers to voters to cast their votes, even if the Card Reader failed to authenticate their PVCs once their particulars are in the Register & match that on their PVC. So in essence, what many Courts of Appeal did was to annul the elections in places where the number of votes cast exceeded the number of accredited voters captured by Card Reader but the Supreme Court is saying no: the votes cast should include those accredited with Voter's Register only (popularly called "manual accreditation". Once that happened, most Petitions fail at the Supreme Court because, as I explained earlier, most Petitioners put all their eggs in the single basket of Card Reader. INEC failed to get the National Assembly to further amend the Electoral Act to legislate Card Reader into law as a legal means of accreditation. They only issued a directive that Card Reader should be used; however this is what Section 138(2) of the Electoral Act provides: "An act or omission which may be contrary to an instruction or directive of the Commission or of an officer appointed for the purpose of the election but which is not contrary to the provisions of this Act shall not of itself be a ground for questioning the election". Clearly accreditation without using Card Readers is not contrary to the Electoral Act & is therefore not a ground for nullifying any election. This is all the Supreme Court is saying. I can vouchsafe that the CJN & other Noble Lords of the SC are not happy with the outcomes but what can they do when INEC failed to do the needful? What can they do when Petitioners failed to prove their case to the exacting degree & standards required by law? Remember the Court, including Supreme Court does not make law; they only interpret it. Lastly it is intriguing that no one heard the voice of SAGAY & his ilk when the Court of Appeal, Lagos Division gave THE VERY FIRST JUDGMENT EVER on the issue of Card Reader, holding that it was not part of our electoral laws. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal brought by the PDP & their candidate, Agbaje against the APC & Ambode which was premised on Card Reader. Sagay & others like him praised the sagacity of the CA but because the same interpretation by the CA on Card Reader which favored the APC then now favors the PDP at the Apex Court, our Noble Lords of the SC are being rubbished by ignorant comments.

“The reason is corruption,” he said, adding that the cost of projects were often inflated as people entrusted with public trust struggle to enrich themselves at the expense of the people.

TonyeBarcanista:
No passage IN the Bible talked about sex "outside marriage". This is just your interpretation. When Bible talks of sexual immorality, it refers to prostitution and promiscuity(having random sex).

Was David married to Solomon's mother before he had sex with her? The concubines Solomon had were they "married to him"? The woman(Abigail) that Abrahim slept with did he marry her before the sex?

Did God punish these people or the women for their acts?

PS: David was reprimanded for Killing the husband.


Meanwhile, the Bible is like a religious book of Christian adherents. It doesn't apply to hindus or muslims, and it doesn't define morality! FACT! Nevertheless, it never condemned pre-marital sex! Fact!

Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed fornication, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand

Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun.

So they pitched a tent for Absalom on the roof, and he slept with his father’s concubines in the sight of all Israel.

The times of ignorance therefore God overlooked. But now he commands that all people everywhere should repent,

Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

TonyeBarcanista:
Virginity isn't a virtue neither is non-virginity a vice.


What is morally wrong in preïmarital sex for two consensual people? Or which book did you read that it is virtuous to be a virgin and morally wrong to be non-virgin?

1 Thessalonians 4:3-4New International Version (NIV)

3 It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; 4 that each of you should learn to control your own body[a] in a way that is holy and honorable,

Ephesians 5:3New International Version (NIV)

3 But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people.

forgiveness:
Just to know those behind the recent judgement either for good or bad, we need to know them for future reference ...

Public officials are not confidential officials hence the word public. Meaning, it is your social responsibility to know them and we call it civic education. That's all.

agabusta:
What is this one saying? These are public officials who should be known by majority of citizens.

The OP copied this info from the website of the supreme court.

Every public official who is sure of his integrity should not be afraid of public scrutiny. This is not a military regime, or the olden days with few educated who in turn tell fables to the less educated.

You must be a serious joker to imagine that getting people to know the supreme court justices we have is tantamount to degrading our society.

Judges are public workers and are subject to the scrutiny of the public.

Toks2008:
Most of us are always eager to get a job or start a business in order to make ends meet and as we get carried away in our search,we tend to cross the line from taking up our desirable and fulfilling job,business to settling for the available anywhere belle face business or job without considering the comfort zone factor.

1.Do i enjoy what i do?: The truth is that while the amount of money we make has become the yardstick to ascertain a good job or business,it is important to note that if you do a job or business you don't enjoy doing then you are indeed enslaving yourself no matter how huge the salary or profit margin..YOU NEED TO ENJOY WHAT YOU DO.



2.If i wake up in 20years from now and still find myself in this job or business will i be proud of myself?: This is a very vital question because the truth is that there is absolutely nothing bad in taking up a business or job for the time being but the unfortunate twist is that in most cases,you tend to get trapped by any business or job you start even when you don't intend to and many people have woken up many years latter in life to realize that the job or business they intended doing for a short time have taken all their active period of life..Quite unfortunate