₦airaland Forum

•Hope UzodinmaABUJA – The legal team of former Governor Emeka Ihedioha of Imo State has opened up on the controversial judgement of the Supreme Court installing Senator Hope Uzodinma as governor.
The statement released by Rotimi Peters reads:

‘Supreme Court Judgment In Sen. Uzodinma & APC Vs. Emeka Ihedioha & 2 Others: Putting The Record Straight – Rotimi Peters Esq.’
INTRODUCTION

1.01 On 14.1.2020, the Supreme Court heard the appeal filed by Senator Hope Uzodinma and APC (numbered as shown above) against the judgment of the Court of Appeal affirming the victory of Emeka Ihedioha and the PDP in the Imo State Governorship election on 9.3.2019.

1.02 The Court of Appeal had, on 19.11.2019, affirmed the judgment of the Governorship election tribunal which dismissed the petition of Senator Uzodinma and APC against the return of Emeka Ihedioha and PDP at the Imo State governorship election held on 9.3.2019.

1.03 Soon after hearing oral arguments of senior counsel for the parties, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment and allowed it, and ordered, amongst others, that Senator Uzodinma be sworn in as the Governor of Imo State.

1.04 Since the delivery of the judgment, commentators have rendered all kinds of opinions on the facts of the case and the judgment of the Supreme Court. Some of the commentators are legal practitioners who were not involved in any professional manner with the case from its inception at the election tribunal up to its conclusion at the Supreme Court. Their comments or opinions now in the public domain, expectedly, are shallow and uninformed and are capable of misinforming the public.

1.05 It has, therefore, become imperative to put the record straight for the benefit of the reading public, even if it would not reverse the unfortunate decision of the Supreme Court and the obvious injustice it has occasioned. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE2.01 In the result of the Imo State Governorship election held on 9.3.2019, INEC declared that Emeka Ihedioha scored the highest number of votes – 273,404 amongst all the candidates and met the constitutional requirements, and was returned. The other three candidates coming behind him were credited with the following votes:

Uche Nwosu (AA): 190,364

Ifeanyi Araraume (APGA): 114,676

Hope Uzodinma (APC): 96,458

2.02 Each of these candidates filed an election petition at the tribunal premised on different grounds. Senator Uzodinma’s petition was premised largely on the false ground that elections were conducted in certain 388 polling units, but the results of the elections which he had copies of (and which were favourable to him) were wrongly excluded by INEC in their collation of results of the election; that if those results were taken into account, he would have won the election.

2.03 The respondents in the petition, including INEC, denied the above allegations and characterised the purported results as false in their respective replies to the petition. Two short examples may be provided here. In paragraph 8i of Ihedioha’s reply to the petition, it is averred inter alia:” . . . Petitioners have embarked on a scheme to introduce false result sheets into the result of the election. They are thus put to the strictest proof of the origin of the result, the existence of the polling units as well as the distribution of election materials to those purported Polling Units.”

2.04 In paragraph 7c of INEC’s reply, it is averred inter alia: “The 3rd Respondent did not omit to record and reckon with votes due to the Petitioners as alleged. . . and any such showing results are fictitious and suborned.”

2.05 It is thus clear from the foregoing, and having regard to decided cases, particularly of the Supreme Court, that the petitioners had the burden of proving the conduct of elections in those polling units, the results emanating from them and the impact those results would have on the result of the election as declared.

2.06 At the hearing of the petition, Senator Uzodinma and APC called 54 witnesses out of which only 28 were polling unit agents. No ward collation agent was called as a witness. Senator Uzodinma himself testified as PW11. His State Collation agent testified as PW51 and a certain police officer testified as PW54. The other 23 witnesses were local government collation agents and sundry witnesses.

2.07 It is noteworthy that purported results of the election, relied on by the petitioners, were tendered from the Bar in bags and sacks! They remained there throughout the trial, except for the few which were specifically mentioned by the 28 polling unit agents. PW54, a Deputy Commissioner of Police, whose presence and testimony were challenged by the respondents, tendered documents in a pack which he described as result sheets from 366 polling units. He did not open any of them or refer specifically to them. He admitted, in cross-examination, that he did not know the figures they contained or the polling units they were concerned with.

2.08 It is, again, noteworthy that the 28 polling unit agents and PW11 admitted, in cross-examination, that the result sheets which they identified were not legible or did not contain the scores of all the political parties which contested the election. The 28 polling agents also admitted that those purported result sheets did not contain any entry to show the number of ballot papers issued to the respective polling units; the number of ballot papers used and unused in those polling units. Many of the sheets did not show the names and signatures of the presiding officers, and the date of issuance. In some of them, the dates written on them were before or after 9.3.2019.

2.09 PW11 admitted in cross-examination, when confronted with his chart in the petition, that some of the results he listed showed over voting. 3. JUDGMENTS OF THE COURTS3.01 It was because of the foregoing facts and evidence that the election tribunal, in its judgment, agreed with the respondents that the petitioners did not prove the existence of other results from the so-called 388 polling units. In respect of the evidence of PW54, the police officer, the tribunal, again, agreed with the respondents that he had no locus to be a witness and that his evidence was worthless as he could not tie his testimony to any of the documents he presented. The tribunal held that the petitioners merely dumped documents on the tribunal without relevant oral evidence.3.02 In making these pronouncements, the tribunal relied on the many decisions of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal which have determined the manner such evidence as given by the petitioners should be evaluated. The tribunal, therefore, dismissed the petition.

3.03 At the Court of Appeal, the petitioners complained that the tribunal was in error in dismissing the petition and, in particular, in denouncing the presence of PW54 as a witness and rejecting his evidence. The respondents offered opposing arguments.

3.04 The Court of Appeal, in its majority decision of 4-1, agreed with the petitioners that PW54 was a competent witness, but affirmed the decision of the tribunal that his evidence had no probative value. It dismissed the appeal. The minority judgment upheld the complaints of the petitioners and held that they had proved their case, but it did not say, significantly, the number of additional votes which the petitioners proved in order to show that they had scored a majority of lawful votes cast in the election.

3.05 The petitioners, aggrieved with the decision of the Court of Appeal, appealed to the Supreme Court. Ihedioha, aggrieved with the portion of the decision that PW54 was a competent witness, also appealed to the Supreme Court, and his appeal was numbered as SC.1470/2019.

3.06 As stated above, on 14.1.2020, the Supreme Court heard arguments on the appeals and delivered a judgment soon after. The petitioners’ appeal was allowed, but Ihedioha’s appeal was struck out. 4. REMARKS4.01 In allowing the appeal, the Supreme Court did not state the new scores which the petitioners proved from the 388 polling units, especially having regard to the following facts: (a) that only 28 polling unit agents out of the 388 polling units testified and they admitted that the result sheets had all the vices itemised earlier; (b) that PW11 also admitted over voting apparent in some of the results in the chart in the petition; (c) that more than 90% of result sheets were neither identified nor referred to by any witness; (d) that the respondent, particularly, INEC denied the existence of those result sheets and tendered documentary evidence to show that election did not hold in 388 polling units; (e) that PW54 tendered purported result sheets that were less than the number of polling units mentioned in the petition; (f) that PW54 did not open or read any of the purported result sheets and stated clearly that he did not know the figures or scores they contained or whether there were “mutations or tampering” in them, and that the documents were not submitted to him.

4.02 The Supreme Court did not state that it has computed the new scores, local government by local government, and determined that the petitioners had satisfied the requirements of section 179(2) of the Constitution before it arrived at the decision that Senator Uzodinma should be sworn-in as the new Governor of Imo State.

4.03 In reaching its decision, the Supreme Court ignored well-established principles of law that had guided its previous decision in similar cases. Perhaps, it is better to state that the Court turned those decisions upside down thereby creating the impression of a double standard.

4.04 Two recent decisions of the Supreme Court easily come to mind. The first decision, SC. 409.2019: PDP v. INEC & Others was delivered on 24.5.2019. It was in respect of the Ekiti State governorship election.

4.05 The second decision, SC. 1211/2019: Atiku Abubakar v. INEC (unreported) was delivered on 15.11.2019. At pages 62-63 of the judgment, the Supreme Court reiterated, thus:Before I conclude on this issue, let me state that whenever documents are tendered from the Bar in election matters, the purport is to speed up the trial in view of time limitation in election matters. Such tendering is not the end itself but a means to an end. The makers of such tendered documents must be called to speak to those documents and be cross-examined on the authenticity of the documents. The law is trite that a party who did not make a document is not competent to give evidence on it. It is also the tested position of the law that where the maker of the document is not called to testify, the document would not be accorded probative value by the Court. That indeed is the fate of Exhibit P80 and P24.

4.06 If the decisions in the above cases were applied to the appeal of Senator Uzodinma and APC, the outcome would have been a dismissal of the appeal. It is a matter of concern and conjecture that the Supreme Court, inexplicably, chose to chart a new, strange course in their decision. Unfortunately, the Court did not indicate that it would give reasons for the decision. That would have offered the Court the opportunity to explain the basis of the decision and state the fate of the long-established principles of law it had led the legal profession and the public to believe were trite.

4.07 In the absence of the explanation, it would be difficult for practitioners and the litigating public to respect decisions of the Supreme Court thereby encouraging disregard of the rule of law.

4.08 Before concluding this piece, it is needful to draw attention to a decision of the Supreme Court in SC. 1384/2019: Ugwumba Uche Nwosu v. Action Peoples Party (unreported) delivered on 20.12.2019, during the pendency of the appeals being discussed.

4.09 The first two paragraphs of the judgment are remarkable. They read:This Appeal deals purely with the issue of double nomination. The Appellant contested and won the primaries conducted by All Progressives Congress [APC] on 16/10/2018, and his name was forwarded to INEC (fourth Respondent) as the gubernatorial candidate of APC at the general election slated for 9/3/2019.​But the Appellant also contested and won the Primaries conducted by another Party, Action Alliance, and on 2/11/2018, he was issued with “a Certificate of Return & Confirmation as the duly elected Governorship Candidate” of the said Party.

4.10 The Supreme Court, therefore, held that by “allowing himself to be nominated by two political parties, the Appellant, not only did an act that is not authorised by law, which is illegal, the Electoral Act clearly says in its Section 37, that such a nomination “shall be void”.

4.11 The implication of the above judgment is that Uche Nwosu was the nominated candidate of APC in the election, but that his nomination became void because he had secured “double nomination”. It followed that if Uche Nwosu was factually the candidate of APC in the election, Senator Uzodinma could not have, validly, also be the APC candidate in the same election.

4.12 It was for this reason that Emeka Ihedioha filed an application at the Supreme Court, which was argued on 14.1.2020, contending that Senator Uzodinma and APC’s appeal should be struck out because of the implication in the above-named Supreme Court judgment.

4.13 In the judgment, the Court summarily dismissed Ihedioha’s application on the false basis that the matter of double nomination was a pre-election decision and it could not be applied to the appeal which was a post-election litigation.

4.14 The Supreme Court, in this instance, chose technicality at the expense of substantial justice and denied Ihedioha the benefit of an established legal outcome.

4.15 The effect of the foregoing is that the judgment of the Supreme Court does not reflect the justice of the case. The electorate in Imo State has been short-changed.




https://sundiatapost.com/breaking-ihediohas-legal-team-opens-up-on-supreme-court-judgment/

Sooner DNA will be the bases of giving Birth certificate. Watch out!

djgreenland:
Oga, you just posted rubbish, and you are also telling us you are not alright.


So the amount of broken homes we have is not enough ba?

While sharing your opinion, just don't break your own home.

Home on what foundation?

My Prediction Kano APC Bauchi APC Plateau APC Sokoto APC IMO PDP

Ahmed0336:
Sometimes I keep wondering if we have a functional DPR in this country. This agency need to up her game WTF!!!

Rest in Paradise to those that lost their lives may God Almighty comfort their families and friends.

You are very right
Gas station are often located in secluded areas but here in Nigeria reverse is the case.

Ahmed0336:
Sometimes I keep wondering if we have a functional DPR in this country. This agency need to up her game WTF!!!

Rest in Paradise to those that lost their lives may God Almighty comfort their families and friends.

Gas station are often located in secluded areas but here in Nigeria reverse is the case.

If is true then no 16

Glo is used to that. There was a time I forgot to cancel my auto renewal before my data expired, I called their customer care to help me to cancel it but she arrogantly told me it is impossible even when I had a plan to subscribe for higher one. I ended forcefully subscribe for the #1000.

We deserve better!

sentoms:
It may be a system glitch, probably their software is acting funny. Am sure it will be adjusted to normal once its resolved .

You might be right, the rate was too big to believe.

Caroworld:
Take your mind off the physical intimacy and you will come to grasp the real message figuratively hidden in her words.

I will love to have your interpretation

Senior advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana has stunningly revealed that the leader of the armed DSS operatives who stormed Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu’s court on Friday 6 December, to arrest Omoyele Sowore actually apologised to the judge for the desecration of her court.

The renowned human rights activist made the revelation Sunday, while debunking the press statement issued Saturday by the Department of State Services, in which it denied that its men invaded the court to re-arrest Sowore, Saharareporters publisher and former presidential candidate in the 23 February election.

Falana described the DSS statement as self-contradictory, in that the DSS made an unsuccessful attempt to absolve itself of responsibility for the armed invasion of the court and the illegal re-arrest of Omoyele Sowore, without a warrant or a charge.
First, pretending to forget that the abominable desecration of the Federal High Court was covered live by domestic and international media outfits and journalists, some of whom were also direct victims of the gangsterism, barbarism and brutalisation displayed by officers of the Service on the 6th day of December 2019, the Service has conducted “eye witness” accounts of what transpired with the aim of showing that officers of the Service were not involved in the rearrest of Sowore.

“Second, the Service argues on the one hand that the arrest of Sowore was “stage managed” by his supporters in order to give the Service a bad name whilst also admitting at the same time that officers of the Service arrested Sowore outside the Court.

Having declared that the Service arrested Sowore “outside the court”, despite the “stage managing” argument, what the Nigerian people want to see happen is the immediate release of Sowore, pending his trial as ordered by the court.

Falana then rolled out what he called indubitable facts about the illegality committed by the DSS:

“By the advantage of information technology, the whole world has placed responsibility for the gangsterist desecration of the court on the SSS. The SSS cannot extricate itself from the abominable acts of 6th December, 2019.

“When I informed the court that fresh charges were being filed against our clients and that they could be re-arrested, the prosecution denied any such plan.

“As soon as the case was adjourned the SSS pounced on Sowore and caused a disruption of the proceedings of the court. Having taken over the court room vi et armis(trespass with force) Justice Ojukwu hurriedly rose and asked the Registrar to adjourn all other cases. After the learned trial judge had risen for the day she summoned the heads of the prosecution and defence teams to her chambers.

“When the lead prosecutor, Dr. Liman Hassan SAN denied knowledge of the invasion of her court she directed him to invite the head of the SSS team in the court. When challenged to justify the invasion of the court the officer could not. He apologised to Justice Ojukwu on behalf of the SSS. The judge then directed the officer to withdraw the SSS operatives from the court room. The directive was complied with as the operatives withdrew from the court room but rushed out to join their colleagues who had taken over the entire court house.

“Notwithstanding that the SSS could not produce any warrant of arrest for Sowore the defence team decided that I should accompany him to the SSS headquarters in view of his physical brutalisation inside the court room and the open threat to his life. I did and ensured that he was driven in my car to the SSS headquarters where I handed him over to the officers on duty. Thereafter, I requested for a meeting with the head of the SSS but I was informed that he was not in the office.

Regardless of the form of appearance, the officers of the Service inside Court No. 7 were identifiable by their roles and acts of seizing Sowore and pinning him down. It is an utter poor reasoning to say that Sowore’s supporters were also those bent on injuring him in order to arrest him. The argument of the Service in this respect is as unfortunate and pitiable as the earlier argument of the Service in respect of the Late Chief Gani Fawehinmi who was once accused of wanting to set ablaze his own house.

“Though, ordinarily, officers of the Service do not wear any uniform, on the 6th day of December, some of them were in mufti, many were not only armed but also masked while others disguised in lawyer’s black and white suit.

“Regardless of the form of appearance, the officers of the Service inside Court No. 7 were identifiable by their roles and acts of seizing Sowore and pinning him down. It is an utter poor reasoning to say that Sowore’s supporters were also those bent on injuring him in order to arrest him. The argument of the Service in this respect is as unfortunate and pitiable as the earlier argument of the Service in respect of the Late Chief Gani Fawehinmi who was once accused of wanting to set ablaze his own house.

“If Sowore’s supporters subjected him to such brutalisation in the presence of sss operatives why were they not arrested for contravening the provisions of the Anti Torture Act, 2017? Or were the SSS operatives expecting the supporters of a defendant wanted by the State to kill him in their presence?

“Before submitting himself for arrest Sowore had rightly demanded for a warrant of arrest and detention order but the sss operatives were unable to produce either.

ON RATIONALISATION OF RE-ARREST OF SOWORE BY THE SERVICE

“In rationalizing the re-arrest of Sowore, which is denied in the same Press statement, the Service alleged that Sowore held meetings with some people. Assuming without conceding that Sowore held meetings with some people in Transcorp Hotel as alleged by the SSS, why did the Prosecution not inform the trial court that the defendant had breached his bail condition?



ON THE CLAIM OF THE SERVICE THAT IT IS LAW-ABIDING

“The SSS says it is a law abiding institution. But why did it refuse to comply with the order of Justice Taiwo to release Sowore? Why did the SSS threaten to report the judge to the NJC for granting bail to Sowore?

“Why did the SSS subject the order of Justice Ojukwu for the release of Sowore to its own approval by asking the sureties already verified by the judge to report themselves to the SSS? Why the SSS wait for the 24-hour ultimatum issued by the trial judge before releasing Sowore and Bakare,?

“Incidentally, the current prosecutor, Dr. Liman Hassan SAN was the counsel to the defendant in the case of FRN v Air Commodore Mohammed. In that case the order of Justice Nnamdi Dimgba for the release of the defendant on bail was flouted by the SSS. As if that was not enough, the SSS invaded the home of the judge on 8th October 2016 when the houses of judges accused of corruption were raided. Even though I have never appeared before Justice Dimgba, I have always known him as a judge of impeccable integrity. So, I challenged the SSS for painting an incorruptible judge with the brush of shame. It was after my intervention that the NJC gave the judge a clean bill of health.

“Thereafter, the judge was compelled to withdraw from the case. The SSS thought that it had won but it was a pyrric victory. Thus, Justice John Tsoho (current Chief Judge of the federal high court) to whom the case was re assigned reiterated the orders of Justice Dimgba and proceeded to rule that trial would not commence in the case until the defendant was released from custody. It was at that stage that the SSS complied with the order of the federal high court.

Conclusion

“In the light of the foregoing we reiterate our demand for the release of not only Sowore in obedience to court orders, pending the verdict of the court in their trial. We equally call for the release of all other political detainees, and criminal suspects who have been admitted to bail pending trial by competent courts.

“Finally, it is common knowledge that this country was ruled by military dictators for about three decades. On no occasion did security operatives invade court premises to arrest political activists inside a court room. Therefore, the bizarre harassment of courts cannot be tolerated under a democratically elected government that claims to operate under the rule of law.

Femi Falana, SAN

https://www.pmnewsnigeria.com/2019/12/08/falana-to-dss-you-lied-on-sowores-re-arrest-court-invasion/

This party will turn Nigeria to one party system

idid:
Stupid party that will soon become history

That are not even talking about the law they are breaking,

Court set the guy free and you wont let him go

Bunch of corrupt idiots.

...Will Soon become history , Through which means?

From the look of things it seems it impossible to remove APC out of power through any democratic means. It must be through this revolution we are all afraid of.

In a statement Sunday night, Lanre Issa-Onilu, APC National Publicity Secretary, through their official Twitter handle said


"Following the recent court drama that greeted the resumed trial of the convener of RevolutionNow, YeleSowore, the PDP
and its defeated presidential candidate, Atiku have typically chosen to present and spread their concocted “alternative facts” and lies on the incident.

The Party will not be drawn into arguements over the powers of the Department of State Services (DSS) to arrest and rearrest Sowore over his actions and utterances. The constitutional mandate of the DSS already addresses that Also, the presidency has clarified that the DSS does not necessarily need the president's permission in all cases to carry out its essential and constitutional responsibilities.

Again, whether Sowore flouted any of his bail conditions or staged the incident in court is..another matter which the court and prosecuting agency should address.

Atiku in his horrid statement particularly accused the DSS of attacking the presiding judge among other lies being chorused by the @OfficialPDPNig and their hirelings.

Documentary evidence such as videos and pictures have shown that the tales are a complete ruse until anyone is able to present a contrary evidence.

If Atiku's intervention was sincere, having realized the truth, he has not deemed it proper to apologise to Nigerians for misinforming them on the incident. Instead, he hangs shamelessly on his lies. A commentator has correctly described Atiku as "the king of the bandwagon".

The PDP and atiku , in their dubious attempt at painting the APC government bad by all means, have chosen to exercise no restraint whatsoever in spreading falsehood. We would continue to reiterate the need for Nigerians to be wary of these people who are bent on bringing our country down.

The APC, therefore, unequivocally rejects the inciting messages and criminal antics of some individuals and partisans who have embarked on a campaign of calumny against this administration and are calling for a forceful takeover of government.They are cowards and enemies of Nigeria.

We call on Nigerians to look at the issue of Sowore's arrest and subsequent trial dispassionately and devoid of the skewed narratives and sentiments being propagated by the likes of Atiku and PDP.

Sowore contested and woefully lost the 2019 presidential election, garnering a meagre 33,953 votes compared to the winner, President Muhammadu Buhari, who polled over 15 million votes. He left the country afterwards and held talks, with pictures to prove,with another wanted secessionist. He returned to the country and openly threatened to lead a violent revolution against a democratically elected government.

Our laws are clear on treason and Nigerians would expect decisive actions from our law enforcement agencies and government. Any attempt to truncate our democracy and threaten our collective peace and safety must and will be resisted using the full weight and instrumentalities of the law."

SIGNED:
@onailu07

National Publicity Secretary
All Progressives Congress (APC)
https://mobile.twitter.com/OfficialAPCNg/status/1203767502217580545

h

ursullalinda:
I just dey pity this man

better pity yourself. If he die today he die for a purpose which will never be forgotten.

APC will win if care is not taken

The Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello through the Office of the state of Secretary to State Government has mandated all head of Ministries, Departments and Agencies to submit in details their stewardship to the New Direction Administration. The reports are to include the following:
Name
Local Government Area
Office Held
Duration
Ward
Poling Unit
Result of Election in PU and ward
Remark

The reports are to be submitted no later than Friday 6th December, 2019

For some of you who could not believe why Dino always defeat Smart Adeyemi under a free and fair election. This is one of the reasons.

Smart Adeyemi said Nigerian should be worshipping Buhari but Dino has been insulting him.

[url=https://m.facebook.com/video_redirect/?src=https%3A%2F%2Fvideo-ams4-1.xx.fbcdn.net%2Fv%2Ft42.9040-2%2F79411322_475106856472995_4187880172034195456_n.mp4%3F_nc_cat%3D107%26efg%3DeyJybHIiOjMwMCwicmxhIjo2NDksInZlbmNvZGVfdGFnIjoic3ZlX3NkIn0%253D%26_nc_ohc%3Dvq5OTzvPW58AQk5VcKfEkmqTeevC5TdfGNFVwI2rl4PtFCbbSrR1P3X4w%26_nc_ht%3Dvideo-ams4-1.xx%26oh%3Da5ffe9de21f651383b887941c71ea025%26oe%3D5DE4B8F7&source=misc&id=451487198895876&noredirect=0&watermark=0&refid=17&ref=opera_speed_dial&_ft_=mf_story_key.2846897748677389%3Atop_level_post_id.2846897748677389%3Atl_objid.2846897748677389%3Acontent_owner_id_new.871775049523012%3Athrowback_story_fbid.2846897748677389%3Apage_id.871775049523012%3Aphoto_id.451487198895876%3Astory_location.4%3Astory_attachment_style.video_inline%3Apage_insights.%7B%22871775049523012%22%3A%7B%22page_id%22%3A871775049523012%2C%22actor_id%22%3A871775049523012%2C%22dm%22%3A%7B%22isShare%22%3A0%2C%22originalPostOwnerID%22%3A0%7D%2C%22psn%22%3A%22EntStatusCreationStory%22%2C%22post_context%22%3A%7B%22object_fbtype%22%3A266%2C%22publish_time%22%3A1575242943%2C%22story_name%22%3A%22EntStatusCreationStory%22%2C%22story_fbid%22%3A%5B2846897748677389%5D%7D%2C%22role%22%3A1%2C%22sl%22%3A4%2C%22targets%22%3A%5B%7B%22actor_id%22%3A871775049523012%2C%22page_id%22%3A871775049523012%2C%22post_id%22%3A2846897748677389%2C%22role%22%3A1%2C%22share_id%22%3A0%7D%5D%7D%7D%3Athid.871775049523012%3A306061129499414%3A2%3A0%3A1577865599%3A-3750400011920769170&__tn__=FH-R]watch the video HERE[/url]

He looks really humble. But I hope am not mistaken cowardliness to humility.

History will repeat itself in this country. Military will still rule until we learn.

bigpicture001:
He is exactly like tinubu...infact tinubu is crazy about being awo....both are yoruba leaders nd billionaires without owning any business....

Government corridor thieves!

Mumu

Low turnout but high results. Nigeria!

The Kogi State Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC), Prof. James Apam, has attributed the low turnout of voters in Saturday’s Kogi West Senatorial District supplementary election to poor mobilisation by the political parties.

He spoke against the backdrop of voters apathy observed in several polling units in wards in Kabba, Mopa Moro and Lokoja.
The REC said that the political parties should be blamed for voter apathy, who according to him, failed at convincing their supporters on the need to come out and vote.

The exercise was however peaceful in Lokoja and other areas of Kogi West, including Odolu in Kabba, Aiyetoro-Gbedde and Demonstration Primary School, in the Asuta Ward voting unit of PDP National Publicity Secretary, Kola Ologbondiyan.

At the Ward B Unit 001, Karaworo, near Pararanda, in Lokoja, accreditation began as early as 8am, after which voting commenced.

While voters’ turnout was impressive in the capital, there was reported voter apathy in parts of Okun land.
In Mopa there was near no sign of the exercise, as most people stayed away from the polling units in the two wards that were affected.

In Kabba, with about seven polling units, voting had ended about two hours before 2pm.

Some of the voters attributed the low turnout to fears of a repeat of the violence that greeted the November 16 poll.

A People’s Democratic Party (PDP) chieftain, who spoke under the condition of anonymity, attributed the low turnout to fears that their votes won’t count.

He said that more of the voters stayed away for fear of being caught in any violent crossfire.

https://thenationonlineng.net/kogi-west-supplementary-blame-low-turnout-on-political-parties-says-rec/

May their souls rest in peace.