The boy here was among those boys sentenced by Justice Falola in 2014 at Ikirun Osun State for armed robbery. None of them is a teenager!They robbed about six families with guns and cutlasses and even fired some men. It was a police man they robbed last that disarmed them.In Law the penalty is death. Justice Falola followed the provision of the law in sentencing them. He however said a letter of Clemency can be written to the Governor then to pardon them because they were first time offenders. The penalties for stealing and armed robberies are not the same. Death sentence is attached to armed robbery in order to discourage it. Lessons : To omo re ko le fun o ni isinm Train your child to give you peace.
I don't have any pity for criminal children who are increasing every day!
ejimatic: . Why is Kanu still in detention? Answer: He jumped bail before . It would take the intervention of the government to release him on bail again!
ndidibabe: My mum will be visiting me in Canada for the first time by January and she is 69 years old. She will also be going to UK to see my younger ones.
I need advice on the basic necessities that will make her stay worthwhile. I do not want to a miss thing paticularly as regards keeping her healthy.
Any suggestions on where to get her suitable clothing in Nigeria for that age travelling to a cold region for the first time? Guys, I need your kind suggestions.
. Must you publicise this on Nairaland? Why don't take your father with her to Canada? Is he late?
Dele accused Babalola. He should give evidences and must be ready to defend all the allegations in court.
I heard Dele was asked to appear on court but he refused because according to him he committed the crime in Lagos;why Ekiti? Dele should have gone to court and seek for the transfer of the case to Lagos. I think his absence made the court remand him until a proper bail application is presented
My advice is Dele should prove all the issues he raised in court . If they are lies then defamation of character is established .
IfnobeGod20: Obi will surprise people, he will generously donate not less than 20m while his perpetual trollers can't even donate 1k else they go hungry.
Those of you that carry Peter Obi for head for no good reason, even in an issue not remotely related to him, an hospital in Kano need your help too.
. The North is cashing out from Obi yet the region will not vote him. Thank you Obi for sharing your booties in politics like other politicians with the North.
ThatWriterBoy: Like I said, I was 16 then and I thought it didn't matter. I didn't tell anybody because I thought it was not an issue. In my school, there's this certificate verification they do where you submit your original JAMB and SSCE results to the council for verification. My JAMB bears my middle name as my first name, while my SSCE is the normal first name, middle and surname arrangement. Since they did not flag it there, I didn't think it would matter. Like, they could have asked me to swear an affidavit, but they didn't.
. Go and make an affidavit to capture the mistake JAMB made and that you are the owner of your school documents . Good luck!
ThatWriterBoy: Hello! Please I need advice. My name on my birth certificate and other documents is James Chika Johnson. James is my first name, Chika my second and Johnson my last name.
When I was registering for the JAMB UTME exams, a mistake was made in the order of my name and Chika was my first name and James my middle. I was like 16 then, and I didn't think it would matter.
Now, because JAMB would send the same name format to the schools during admission and all, I've been like that all these years.
I just received my certificate yesterday, and it bears Chika as my first name and James as my last.
My National ID card, Voters card and all other documents, including my SSCE results are James as my first and Chika as my last name.
This has never been a problem for me. In fact, during our Certificate Verification at school, the council did not bring up any issue because my name in the school was Chika James Johnson, but on my SSCE certificate was James Chika Johnson.
On the school notice board, there was a note that the Student would bear all responsibility for any error once they leave the issuing room if they don't point it out there. But this is not technically an error because I've been going through my university education with this name order. All my tests, exams, and registrations in school.
Please will this affect me later? Like during NYSC registration or something? What can I do?
. Two individuals are in your picture. 1. James Chica Johnson 2. Chica James Johnson
The no 2 is the person in the university .The no 1 did not go to any university . Your NYSC letter will come with Chica James Johnson . I will be factual with you.Yiu are too tardy on this matter. How could you be bearing a wrong name order throught university? In fact like other persons I am suspecting you for a foul play. If this is indeed a mistake as you want us to believe which I am still doubting , it will affect you because people will still ask you questions on it always . You are hereby advised to make an avidivat on this.Yet be prepared to answer questions on your double identity. Don't change any name ; just make an affidavit claiming the naming mistake was at the JAMB registration point . I still doubt your story anyway.
IfnobeGod20: Below is just the extract from the judgement on Oyetola vs Adeleke. For point of emphasis as you read, there was no where the petitioners or respondents made mention of IREVs in their petitions and their response. Oyetola case was more on overvoting and noncompliance to electoral act. His case dwell more on number of accredited voters which was sent to back server and not IREVs, which the court maintained that there was no part of the electoral act that mandated INEC to transmit accredited voters (note the word as you're reading accredited voters and not result sheet), as accredited voters is not the same as number of votes cast. Because many at times the number of accredited voters may be higher than the number of votes cast or equal in some circumstances. Many of you always confusing these two words. The supreme court was even so clear that for Oyetola to prove a case of overvoting the BVAS, voters' register and the EC8 must be accompany together, as you will read below.
The IREVs wasn't totally condemned as you people want us to believe and they gave reason for that. They claimed it can only be a viewing centre and not a collation centre. It was stated in virtually all their judgements as pertaining to presidential election.
"The supreme court has affirmed the election of Ademola Adeleke as the governor of Osun state.
Delivering judgment on Tuesday, a five-member panel of the apex court held that the court of appeal correctly reinstated Adeleke as governor.
In March, the court of appeal sitting in Abuja reinstated Adeleke as the governor of Osun.
A three-member panel of justices of the court held that the Osun election tribunal erred when it ruled that the 1st and 2nd respondents (Gboyega Oyetola and the All Progressives Congress) proved their allegation of over-voting.
According to the panel of judges, Adeleke is the duly elected governor of the state.
The Osun governorship election tribunal, in January, held that Oyetola was able to prove that there was over-voting in some of the polling units.
Consequently, the majority judgment of the tribunal ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to withdraw the certificate of return issued to Adeleke and issue a fresh one to Oyetola as the duly elected governor of Osun.
Dissatisfied with the ruling, Adeleke appealed the judgment at the court of appeal.
In August 2022, Gboyega Oyetola, former Osun governor, and the APC petitioned the tribunal to challenge the victory of Adeleke.
Among several issues, Oyetola contended that there was overvoting in 749 polling units across 10 LGAs of the state.
Delivering judgment on January 27, two out of the three-member panel of the tribunal held that the petitioner was able to prove that there was indeed over-voting in some of the polling units.
Consequently, the majority judgment of the tribunal ordered INEC to withdraw the certificate of return issued to Adeleke and issue a fresh one to Oyetola as the duly-elected governor of Osun.
“For the sake of emphasis, the total lawful votes for each of the candidates after the said deduction of the invalid votes is 314,931 for the first petitioner, and 290,666 for the second respondent,” Tetsea Kume, who read the majority decision, said.
“Consequently, the second respondent did not score a majority of lawful votes cast at the election. The declaration and return is hereby declared null and void.
“The second respondent cannot ‘go lo lo lo lo’ and ‘buga won’ as the duly elected governor of Osun state in the election conducted on the 16th day of July, 2022. See Kizz Daniel song, ‘Buga’.
“Rather, we hereby hold that the first petitioner scored a majority of lawful votes in the said election and is hereby returned as such.
“The first respondent is hereby directed to withdraw the certificate of return issued to the second respondent, and issue it to the first petitioner as the duly elected governor of Osun state.”
Delivering judgment in Oyetola’s appeal, Emmanuel Agim, who read the lead judgment, said the former governor and his party failed to tender relevant materials such as the BVAS from the 744 polling units in the state, INEC voters’ register or form EC8A showing the number of votes cast at each unit.
“It is glaring that the appellant did not provide in evidence, any BVAS, but sought to prove over-voting by means of a report of examination of INEC’s database or backend server,” Agim said.
The court held that the information from the BVR relied on by petitioners was not a direct record of the number of accredited voters but third-hand evidence derived from the database which is second-hand evidence derived from transmissions from the BVAS.
The apex court also noted that the information at the backend saver might not be accurate because the BVAS might fail to transmit records for several reasons including poor internet connection, loss of battery power, and failure of INEC officials to properly press the submit button among others.
“So the database or any extract of it contains only what is transmitted from the BVAS to it and therefore, cannot be a complete and accurate record of the information in the BVAS,” Agim added.
The court further said that no law requires presiding officers to transmit the number of accredited voters or accreditation of the polls to the database or backend server of INEC by BVAS.
“Therefore, the case of the petitioners that the presiding officers were bound to instantly or on-the-spot transmit the number of accredited voters in the BVAS to the backend server of INEC, has no support,” he said.
“In the light of the foregoing, I hold that it is the record in the BVAS machine of the accredited voters or a certified true copy of an INEC certificate of that record for each polling unit that can prove the number of accredited voters in a polling unit on the day of the election and nothing else.”
The court discountenanced the argument of the petitioners that the voters register was not relevant.
Relying on the INEC regulations for the conduct of elections and the electoral act, the court pointed out that the voters register was still relevant in voter accreditation and is to be used as well with the BVAS machine.
“It is glaring from the foregoing that the appellants did not adduce relevant admissible evidence to prove non-accreditation of voters, improper accreditation of voters and over-voting. By virtue of section 131 and section 133(1)(2) of the evidence act, the appellants had the primary legal burden to prove the facts asserted by them in their petition.”
“The court of appeal correctly found that the appellants failed to prove grounds two and three of their petition and correctly allowed the appeal on those grounds to set aside the decision of the tribunal.”
Thank you for making references to the judgements of APC vrs PDP to the SC which set the background for the Tinubu and Atiku ,and Tinubu and Obi judgements in 2023 The question is from all the exctant judgment judgements so far in SC ,can a person win an election case in Nigeria with the IREV contents? My answer is No.! IREV has been deemphasised.Only results on hard copies collated during a given election and signed determine who wins an election ! I always tell people that Oyetola vrs Adeleke case at the SC is a far reaching judgement on the relevance of IREV to the Nigerian elections
Thank you for your opinion.Let await the outcome of the PDP appeal on the Edo election.
IfnobeGod20: I asked you to show me where any judgement of the supreme court said the results on the IREVs would be differ from the results announced at the polling units. Just I had said, you guys should stop manipulating the words of the judges. You claimed the supreme court said, the results on the IREVs would be different from the results announced at the polling units. That was your assertion. I still put it to you, show me where the supreme court said so. All I know that they said was the IREVs wasn't a collation centre but a viewing centre and that the collation that can be rely upon is the one collated with the EC8 at the collation centre as announced by the commission. I am challenging you or the word you use "different".
Meanwhile, the electoral act mandated the electoral commission to provide a means by which results can be transmitted and INEC in their wisdom developed what they called IREVs for the purpose. Please read below the said sections as I quote.
This is the electoral Act quoted verbatim.
Section 60 Nigeria Electoral Act 2022 Counting of votes and forms
(1) The Presiding officer shall, after counting the votes at the polling unit, enter the votes scored by each candidate in a form to be prescribed by the Commission as the case may be.
'footnote' Note the words "to be prescribed by the commission"
(2) The form shall be signed and stamped by the presiding officer and counter signed by the candidates or their polling agents where available at the polling unit.
(3) The presiding officer shall give to the polling agents and the police officer where available a copy each of the completed forms after it has been duly signed as provided under subsection (2).
(4) The presiding officer shall count and announce the result at the polling unit.
(5) The presiding officer shall transfer the results including total number of accredited voters and the results of the ballot in a manner as prescribed by the Commission. 'footnote' Pls what are they transferring? Did the commission prescribed any method to transfer the said accredited voters and results of the ballot?
(6) A presiding officer who wilfully contravenes any provision of this section commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not more than N5 00,000 or imprisonment for a term of at least six months.
'Footnote' This is the penalty accrued for not following the law and guideline provided by the commission.
Section 64 Nigeria Electoral Act 2022
(4) A collation officer or returning officer at an election shall collate and announce the result of an election, subject to his or her verification and confirmation that the – (a) number of accredited voters stated on the collated result are correct and consistent with the number of accredited voters recorded and transmitted directly from polling units under section 47 (2) of this Act;
'footnote' Note the word recorded and transmitted. The word is not submitted but transmitted. These are two different words, meaning different thing.
(b) the votes stated on the collated result are correct and consistent with the votes or results recorded and transmitted directly from polling units under section 60 (4) of this Act.
'footnote' Transmitted directly from the polling units.
(5) Subject to subsection (1), a collation officer or returning officer shall use the number of accredited voters recorded and transmitted directly from polling units under section 47 (2) of this Act and the votes or results recorded and transmitted directly from polling units under section 60 (4) of this Act to collate and announce the result of an election if a collated result at his or a lower level of collation is not correct.
'footnote' It is even mandatory for a collation officer or returning officer to compare the recorded results with transmitted results from the above section.
You may also read the Justice Okoro unanimous judgement on Tinubu vrs Atiku and Tinubu vrs Obi
I repeat that IREV results are meaningless considering the SC judgements on them . Until the stand of the SC is vacated anybody PDP LP or APC using IREV irregularities as the basis of election appeals is just waisting resources and time. Hard copies of results declared by the INEC stay!
IfnobeGod20: I asked you to show me where any judgement of the supreme court said the results on the IREVs would be differ from the results announced at the polling units. Just I had said, you guys should stop manipulating the words of the judges. You claimed the supreme court said, the results on the IREVs would be different from the results announced at the polling units. That was your assertion. I still put it to you, show me where the supreme court said so. All I know that they said was the IREVs wasn't a collation centre but a viewing centre and that the collation that can be rely upon is the one collated with the EC8 at the collation centre as announced by the commission. I am challenging you or the word you use "different".
Meanwhile, the electoral act mandated the electoral commission to provide a means by which results can be transmitted and INEC in their wisdom developed what they called IREVs for the purpose. Please read below the said sections as I quote.
This is the electoral Act quoted verbatim.
Section 60 Nigeria Electoral Act 2022 Counting of votes and forms
(1) The Presiding officer shall, after counting the votes at the polling unit, enter the votes scored by each candidate in a form to be prescribed by the Commission as the case may be.
'footnote' Note the words "to be prescribed by the commission"
(2) The form shall be signed and stamped by the presiding officer and counter signed by the candidates or their polling agents where available at the polling unit.
(3) The presiding officer shall give to the polling agents and the police officer where available a copy each of the completed forms after it has been duly signed as provided under subsection (2).
(4) The presiding officer shall count and announce the result at the polling unit.
(5) The presiding officer shall transfer the results including total number of accredited voters and the results of the ballot in a manner as prescribed by the Commission. 'footnote' Pls what are they transferring? Did the commission prescribed any method to transfer the said accredited voters and results of the ballot?
(6) A presiding officer who wilfully contravenes any provision of this section commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not more than N5 00,000 or imprisonment for a term of at least six months.
'Footnote' This is the penalty accrued for not following the law and guideline provided by the commission.
Section 64 Nigeria Electoral Act 2022
(4) A collation officer or returning officer at an election shall collate and announce the result of an election, subject to his or her verification and confirmation that the – (a) number of accredited voters stated on the collated result are correct and consistent with the number of accredited voters recorded and transmitted directly from polling units under section 47 (2) of this Act;
'footnote' Note the word recorded and transmitted. The word is not submitted but transmitted. These are two different words, meaning different thing.
(b) the votes stated on the collated result are correct and consistent with the votes or results recorded and transmitted directly from polling units under section 60 (4) of this Act.
'footnote' Transmitted directly from the polling units.
(5) Subject to subsection (1), a collation officer or returning officer shall use the number of accredited voters recorded and transmitted directly from polling units under section 47 (2) of this Act and the votes or results recorded and transmitted directly from polling units under section 60 (4) of this Act to collate and announce the result of an election if a collated result at his or a lower level of collation is not correct.
'footnote' It is even mandatory for a collation officer or returning officer to compare the recorded results with transmitted results from the above section.
. I want to advise that you read justice Again lead judgment on Oyetola vrs Adeleke 2023 which was upheld by Justice Okoro unanimous judgment at the SC.
. Do not give us any stress.Our data are with you.Yiu can upgrade it for business purposes. In my opinion this excersise is to generate income for the government.Pronto
advanceDNA: Judge u say?? Hahahahaha....it's like u just arrived Nigeria yesterday.....The very horrible and tight supply chain of corruption that exist in Nigeria wouldn't have been so bad without these Judges....
. I agree with you. Here is the man who deliberately went into hiding and evaded arrest for a long time. His lawyers even came to the court with the bail application without arraingement! A sane judge would deny the bail. However as you suggested a lot of underneath calls must have been made on his behalf by the interested parties
IfnobeGod20: Check this your statement "the results on IREV do not have to be similar with what we have on IREV". It's incoherent.
Meanwhile, I challenge you to show us where the supreme court said the results on IREVs would not necessarily be the same with hard copies declared by the INEC at the polling booths. I challenge you to this.
What the supreme court said was, the IREVs is not a collation centre but a viewing centre, that it was only meant to viewing results only and not for collation. They never meant that the results from IREVs would be different from the hard copies announced by Presiding Officer at the polling booths.
You people should stop disseminating false narration.
. In the case of Oyetola and Adeleke 2022 supra Oyetola won at the Tribunal because there were cases of over voting in the results on IREV.No ruling on IREV matter before any court as at that time . However at the AC the honourable court held that results declared at the poling units and the collation centre superceded those online results which according to the majority judgement could be tampered with and affected by electronic loss and manipulated by the interested parties in the election.Adeleke won. Dissatisfied Oyetola approached the SC on the matter. The Apex Court held that only hard copies of results declared at the polling units and the collation centers are acceptable in Nigeria and agreed with the conclusion of the AC on the matter. With that conclusion I know IREV results are just a waste of time. The constitution is even silent about IREV
In the case of Tinubu APC vrs Atiku PDP 2023 supra Obi LP vrs APC Tinubu 2023 supra I said it on Nairaland that with reliance on IREV as the basis of the appelants Tinubu would win at the court. Many people were angry with me. The forgot that cases were not won online but with judicial precedents. The AC ruled in favour of Tinubu on the ground that IREV resul ts are not reliable and are susceptible to manipulation.The SC upheld the judgement and discredited the use of IREV. Until the SC vacates the existing judgement , parties at the election should concentrate on the results declared at the poling units and the collation centre. IREV results are just a waste of time as they can not be used to win any election case in Nigeria.
Bergavis: Your parents have unfortunately wasted money on your education. I genuinely feel for your parents who expended their finances on your schooling. The query at hand is whether party agents authenticated the result sheets from INEC? Are you not observing that the legitimate results from all the polling units bear the signatures of the party agents, while the counterfeit results utilized by INEC lack such confirmations?
. I will not respond to your reply.I have realized you are interested party in the matter. Interested parties are always crazy rude, impulsive and confused online. They believe nobody should share any opinion apart from theirs. That is why you are addressing me like a hooligan and gangster online. Learn how to talk to people you don't know You are uncouth and barbaric and uncivilized. . I wish you good luck when you present your case at the Tribunal as the prospective governor of Edo.
Bergavis: Your parents have unfortunately wasted money on your education. I genuinely feel for your parents who expended their finances on your schooling. The query at hand is whether party agents authenticated the result sheets from INEC? Are you not observing that the legitimate results from all the polling units bear the signatures of the party agents, while the counterfeit results utilized by INEC lack such confirmations?
. I will not respond to your reply.I have realized you are interested party in the matter. Interested parties are always crazy rude, impulsive and confused online. They believe nobody should share any opinion apart from theirs. That is why you are addressing me like a hooligan and gangster online. Learn how to talk to people you don't know You are uncouth and barbaric and uncivilized. Gutter you come from pls return to mentally detailed people you belong to. I wish you good luck when you present your case at the Tribunal as the prospective governor of Edo.
HIGHESTPOPORI: That means that Inec can be announcing written results different from results gotten from polling unit
. Results written at the polling units are more reliable than any thing on the IREV .The SC held that IREV results could be manipulated. The SC judgements in 2022 and 2023 "killed' IREV results and opened a window for discrediting anything posted online as IREV . Any body who relies on IREV results to win an election matter is just wasting his time.
A forensic audit group, TAPI, has analyzed how INEC rigged the September 21st election.
The group states that INEC created fake result sheets, and what was uploaded on IREV by INEC staff from the polling units was different from what the commission announced at the collation center and the CTC copy provided by the commission.
Watch the full Video with other shocking revelations below:
. Stop creating tensionin Nigeria. The results on IREV do not have to be similar with what we have on IREV .Only the hard copies results declared by the INEC from the polling booths to the State. Ollation Center are reliable now in Nigeria. IREV results are waste of time . The SC ruled on that in 2023 and 2022 on that
European Football (EPL, UEFA, La Liga) › Re: Chelsea Vs Fulham (1 - 2) On 26th December 2024 by ejimatic: 7:48pm On Dec 26, 2024
