₦airaland Forum

fergie001:
What's the distance from Yenagoa to Third Mainland Bridge?

Mathematicians, help....

Let me goan call Prof ObuksBayelsa

B² + sin 45 cos240 * 2lin4 (cos 69)

Dansuqi:
Stop sypporting pdp its very shameful

Who released you

fergie001:
https://punchng.com/pdp-dumps-plans-to-seek-review-of-scourt-judgments/amp/

Actually PDP has no plan to review those cases.

It's just a press release to APC reviewing of Bayelsa and Zamfara.

As for IMO PDP is going ahead

DonFreshmoney:
When are they elevating this bulkachuwa woman to the supreme court

She is retiring in a matter of weeks

fergie001:
I align with all of your provisions Sir.

Where I think the SC goofed the most, was at the bolded.

In the case of Bayelsa, Eko (JSC) rightly said..give to the second withdrawal who participated in all stages of the election with the spread. The assignment went over to INEC.

In.the case of Zamfara, Galinje (JSC) also posited, give to the second with the geographical spread who participated in all stages of the election. INEC took it from there.

In this case, the judgement was explicitly wrong because it was definite. Kekere-Ekun and other panel.members were wrongly definite in throwing away Sections 179(2) of the Constitution.

Ihedioha might not be returned but there are sections of that judgement they will take back.

2 likely scenario.

1. Order rerun.

2. Correct the excess votes. However because its supreme.

However, going by Bayelsa review ruling.


[qoute]The Supreme Court cannot reverse its substantive judgment. It can only correct clerical errors its verdict.

Order 8 Rules 16 of the Supreme Court Rules provides that “the court shall not review any judgment once given and deliver by it, save to correct any clerical mistake or some errors arising from any accidental slip or omission or to vary the judgement or order so as to give effect to its meaning or intention.

“The judgment or order shall not be varied when it correctly represents what the court decided nor shall the operative and substantive part of it be varied and in different form substituted.”

The apex court held that the APC's applications did not show any clerical mistake that needs to be corrected in the judgment which they sought to be reviewed.

Also, the applications failed to point out any accidental slip or omission in the said judgment or showed this court any part of the said judgment that needs to be varied so as to give effect to its meaning or intention.

The court said the APC's applications were asking the court to change the substantive judgment which is against the Court's rule.

To put it simply, the APC's applications do not fall under the categories of issue that can be reviewed by the Supreme Court.[\quote]

fergie001:
Thanks for the mention.

It was posted here sometime last week...but my head was on Bayelsa, I will take my time now.

I have my own issues with the fact that post-election cases die 74 days after the judgement of the CoA.

There is validity in the case, esp. on geographical spread.
You can overlook Electoral Act but never the Constitution. (If you want to base on technicalities)

There is a conflict here only the SC can unbundle.
Will they stick to the Electoral Act of 60 days OR will they say let's look at these errors for posterity sake.

The fact is....it's in their hands right now.

Part of the clerical errors spotted was that the Supreme court did not give the latest results regulation


Accredited voters
Result after adding the 388 PU

So the supreme is expected to put the figures out for all to see.

Even if they dont reverse the case.

The excess votes should be addressed.

However that may have the effect on the Judgement.

We fold our hands and watch

fergie001:
He knew there was no case, he just wanted to intimidate the judges.

But Aare f<ck up sha....

Real one.

I know it must be wole that pushed him to do that hoping to use his age and influence for intimidation.

Afamed:
You have finally regained your voice after Atiku refused to cum

You will dey alright las las

Freeman1986:
This serves Afe Bablola and Wole Right, i couldn't believe that Afe could stoop so low to file a questionable case based on fraud and forgery for review,what happened to reputation an conscience? Today I take back my respect for these two,they are not a good example to follow.

Afe can pay it. That's the school fees of 10 200L medicine at Afe Babalola University

Lostz:
except dansuqi.

Senatordave should help him pay the fine

Please allow them to rest abeg.

They will soon come with another technicality why supreme court must re-review the case again

fergie001:
That's why his own is annoying me more... He brought it up for review in July 2019. It was thrown out and he is bringing it up again

He should be made to pay all PDP lawyers at least 10million naira....then we Nairalanders 10m naira each for wasting our time to go through this horsesh!t again.

He must pay from his pocket.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/punchng.com/supreme-court-strikes-out-apcs-request-for-review-of-judgment-on-partys-candidates-in-zamfara/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pulse.ng/news/politics/zamfara-supreme-court-rejects-apcs-request-to-review-judgement/mdvzcly.amp

Wole Olanipekun is biting more than He can chew.

He more of technical counsel looking for technicalities about than issue and substance of his case..
That cost him the case

Lostz:
I didn't know the case has already been reviewed before. the man should quickly withdraw on the next adjourned date.

Its too late to do that.

Even if he withdraw,


The SC will still make pronouncement about it

CanadaOrBust:
(OP put your post in quotes so these people won’t keep re-posting the whole long post.
*Thanks for doing just that. Good man*)

The following is from 2 days ago. How any person with any sense of fairness and justice can read it and still be supporting that travesty of a judgment beats me. Even a non-political, non-partisan person like myself can tell it is different from any of the other cases.
Note the bolded.

You're welcome,

They will soon come for you with their ravaging tantrums

APC, PDP react to Supreme Court’s adjournment of Imo election review

The All Progressives Congress, APC, and the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, on Tuesday, aired their opinions regarding the adjournment of the Supreme Court review on the January 14, 2020 judgement till March 2nd, as requested by the PDP, to respond to motions that were served on them by the APC.

To this end, Vanguard called the APC and PDP, in Owerri, to have their reactions following the adjournment of the review case.

Recalled, the 14 January 2020, in the Supreme court judgement sacked Emeka Ihedioha of the PDP, as governor of Imo and validated Hope Uzodinma, of the APC, as the legally elected governor of the state.

On the supreme court adjournment, according to the PDP, publicity Secretary, Damian Opara, he said: “APC and Senator Hope Uzodinma, filled a motion that was served on the applicants.

“Normally, when you filed such motion they need time to study and respond to it. How can somebody say that they were not prepared in a matter they filled long time ago. The lawyers needed time to study and reply them. We are fully prepared for the matter.

When asked if his party is in a high expectation, he said: “Well, I am not a lawyer but the little I know justice will prevail.”

While on the side of Uzodinma, his APC, state Publicity Secretary, Enyinnaya Onuegbu, said: “The reasons for asking for adjournment was that the processes were still coming in. Maybe they have filed or they were still supposed to file.

“Yesterday, they filed and served something a fresh application which apparently the respondents have not responded to.

“What I mean is that the reply that the Senator Hope Uzodinma and APC, served on Agabi, probably the lawyer to the applicant would want to serve further responses.

“But the only thing is that why will they asked for a hearing notice despite knowing that all the processes have not come in. They are asking for a hearing notice and inconvenience the party on the other side.

“But it is allowed for the party on the other side to ask for an adjournment. You see we did not oppose to the application we conceded to it normally the courts do not have any choice than to consent to such an adjournment.

When asked by Vanguard if APC is still in high expectation, he said: “We have the judgement of the supreme court. The governor has been sworn-in and adjudicating the function of the office including payment of the civil servant.

“He paid January salaries by 26 of January, the governor has allowed most unusually contractors appointed by the past administration to continue their contracts.

“We are already in the office, so we do not expect any change because the time to contest any election petition matter in court has come and gone.”

On the governor yet to arrive in Imo, Onuegbu said: “The governor accompanied the president to Ethiopia, for four to five days, the governor by law is expected to attend federal executive council meeting Wednesday.

“The Imo state has a liaison office in Abuja, that is why wherever the governor, is that is where the government house is. The functions of government runs smoothly with other appointees and the civil servants. Yes, we should expect the governor home.”

https://www.vanguardngr.com/2020/02/apc-pdp-react-to-supreme-courts-adjournment-of-imo-election-review/amp/

gawu1:
That guy is really an unrepentant crook. Let me reproduce verbatim some part of what he wrote himself here for the gullible ones who have aligned with him ignorantly
''3. Lawyer to Uzodinma and the APC, Damian Dodo (SAN), said he was not opposed to an adjournment.

4. He said two similar applications had been served on him, with neither stating which of them they should rely on.

5. “Just for the purpose of clarity, there is an application on February 5, which we have reacted to.

6. “We got another application on February 17. We want to be clear on which application we will be dealing with when we come back,” Dodo said.

Since you refuse to listen and learn.

The All Progressives Congress, APC, and the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, on Tuesday, aired their opinions regarding the adjournment of the Supreme Court review on the January 14, 2020 judgement till March 2nd, as requested by the PDP, to respond to motions that were served on them by the APC.


To this end, Vanguard called the APC and PDP, in Owerri, to have their reactions following the adjournment of the review case.

Recalled, the 14 January 2020, in the Supreme court judgement sacked Emeka Ihedioha of the PDP, as governor of Imo and validated Hope Uzodinma, of the APC, as the legally elected governor of the state.

On the supreme court adjournment, according to the PDP, publicity Secretary, Damian Opara, he said: “APC and Senator Hope Uzodinma, filled a motion that was served on the applicants.


“Normally, when you filed such motion they need time to study and respond to it. How can somebody say that they were not prepared in a matter they filled long time ago. The lawyers needed time to study and reply them. We are fully prepared for the matter.

When asked if his party is in a high expectation, he said: “Well, I am not a lawyer but the little I know justice will prevail.”


While on the side of Uzodinma, his APC, state Publicity Secretary, Enyinnaya Onuegbu, said: “The reasons for asking for adjournment was that the processes were still coming in. Maybe they have filed or they were still supposed to file.

“Yesterday, they filed and served something a fresh application which apparently the respondents have not responded to.

“What I mean is that the reply that the Senator Hope Uzodinma and APC, served on Agabi, probably the lawyer to the applicant would want to serve further responses.


“But the only thing is that why will they asked for a hearing notice despite knowing that all the processes have not come in. They are asking for a hearing notice and inconvenience the party on the other side.

“But it is allowed for the party on the other side to ask for an adjournment. You see we did not oppose to the application we conceded to it normally the courts do not have any choice than to consent to such an adjournment.


When asked by Vanguard if APC is still in high expectation, he said: “We have the judgement of the supreme court. The governor has been sworn-in and adjudicating the function of the office including payment of the civil servant.


https://www.vanguardngr.com/2020/02/apc-pdp-react-to-supreme-courts-adjournment-of-imo-election-review/amp/

shekauvsbuhari:
pls have they decided on bayelsa matter?

Bayelsa APC only have Audio Review and Micreants going about ordering INEC to conduct new election

LibertyRep:
A review or an appeal

A Review

kahal29:
You are good at twisting facts and publishing Half truths

Why not present your true facts instead of the paths you're threading

A lot had been said about yesterday Re-Visit on the Re-Visit of the Sureme court Rulings regarding the Governorship Election in Imo state and Zamfara State.

Below are the proceedings yesterday in summary.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday adjourned the hearing in an application filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and sacked Imo State Governor Emeka Ihedioha till March 2.

In the application, the PDP and Ihedioha are praying the court to, among others, reverse its judgment of January 14, this year, with which it sacked Ihedioha and replaced him with Hope Uzodinma of the All Progressives Congress (APC).


At the mention of the case yesterday,

1[b]. Ihedioha’s lead lawyer Kanu Agabi (SAN) said parties were filing and exchanging documents.

2. He said: “My lord, all the processes grounding this application are still coming in. I am compelled to ask for an adjournment to enable all the processes to come in.

“I ask for a short adjournment of about seven days to enable us to put in more processes.”

3. Lawyer to Uzodinma and the APC, Damian Dodo (SAN), said he was not opposed to an adjournment.

4. He said two similar applications had been served on him, with neither stating which of them they should rely on.

5. “Just for the purpose of clarity, there is an application on February 5, which we have reacted to.

6. “We got another application on February 17. We want to be clear on which application we will be dealing with when we come back,” Dodo said.

7. Lawyer to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Tanimu Inuwa (SAN), said he was not objecting to Agabi’s request for an adjournment.

8. Ruling, the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Ibrahim Muhammad, who led the court’s seven-man panel, ordered the parties to file and exchange necessary processes before the next adjournment date.

9. Justice Muhammad directed parties to tighten all loose ends before the next date and adjourned till March [/b]2.

For the Zamfara Judgement Review


The Supreme Court, also yesterday, rescheduled the hearing for March 2 in the application by the Abdul’aziz Yari’s faction of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Zamfara State.

1. The faction is seeking a review of the court’s May 24, 2019 judgment, which voided the participation of the party’s candidates in the last elections in the state.

At the mention of the case yesterday, Justice Muhammad said it was impossible for the court to proceed to hear because some of the parties had not been served.

Lawyer to Yari’s faction, Robert Clarke (SAN); lawyer to the Senator Gabiru Marafa faction of the APC in Zamfara State, Mike Ozekhome (SAN) and lawyer to INEC, Tanimu Inuwa (SAN), agreed that an adjournment was necessary.

The court adjourned till March 2, 2020, for hearing

https://thenationonlineng.net/supreme-court-to-hear-ihediohas-application-march-2/

Going by the forgoing it is very clear that It was a necessary request from Mr Agabi.

How do you want him to allow the case continue when APC and Hope counsel just served them their processes just Yesterday morning at the court and The court court still want PDP file their processes in response to APC process. The one of 5th and that of 7th.

Good morning

MelesZenawi:
Imagine Bayelsa APC youth where the matter happens are sensible like this to condemn the attack on her Lordship Justice Mary Odili.

If youths from Bayelsa can take this honourable stance why then are this other APC-lefts running mad and silly on nairaland since the verdict...

They will continue wailing on Bayelsa while Ondo will slip off their fingers

Because they are on tramadol overdose

Dansuqi:
Oga,uzodinma application was filed since last week.it was posted here on nairaland so respect yourself.since the ekiti guber tribunal,i have always floored you. Your superior here whether you like it or not

Continue in your fools paradise.

In their joint response, sighted by The Nation on Sunday, Uzodinma and the APC are of the view that the request by Ihedioha and the PDP amounts to a mere academic exercise and an affront to the nation’s Constitution

Sunday


So Supreme court meet on Sunday.


Now read part of the proceeding today.

Ihedioha had through his lawyer, Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN), told the court that processes were still being filed on the case and therefore needed an adjournment to prepare a strong showing.

Agabi said, “My lords, processes are still coming in. Up till this morning, we were still receiving processes. We therefore, apply for an adjournment to enable all the processes to come in.”

Acceding to the request, the seven-man panel of judges led by Chief Justice of Nigeria, Tanko Muhammad, fixed March 2, 2020 for hearing of the matter.

You think that Both APC and uzodima counsel that agree to the request dont know that they thought they will caught Agabi off guard.

Arakunrin wa bi gba lo

Dansuqi:
You lie sir.their reply has been online since last week friday immediately after the address of pdp came out.ask and get it and stop assuming ignorantly

Stop displaying your ignorance.

Is online Supreme court office.

Seem you dont know how PROCESSES are filed in the court.

Stop behaving like and UNCULTURED Child.


I will counsel you and your fellow BMC fellas to go and get the whole proceeding at the court today and stop displaying your uncultured attitude here
.

Why not ask if you dont know

Counsel to Uzodinma and APC, Damian Dodo (SAN) did not oppose the application.

Read more: https://www.dailytrust.com.ng/just-in-supreme-court-adjourns-ihediohas-application.html

kcmichael:
How can both use same lawyer your mumu Don get degree oooooooo

Since you will not stop displaying your stupidity

Go and get the full proceeding at the court today and stop been foolish.


What is your problem.

Someone is giving a person an information and you are here displaying your UNCULTURED Trait here

Dansuqi:
You mean hope or apc or both respondents?

Both of them use the same lawyer and they just file their reponse this morning telling Agabi that's not all.

They want to play fast one but Agabi was very quick to save the situation

kcmichael:
Keep speaking English ,by the time judgemet is given it will clear ur eyes. How can agabi ask for more time at this critical moment,uba wailing just started

Seem you did ot read the full news.

Agabi applied for time to file his reply to APC respondent.

Which is the normal thing to do.

Appeal reponse is in 3 way.

Or you think Agabi will be dull not to file response to APC reply.

When Apc Had not fully file their responses

positivelord:
The request for adjournment coming from this man that want review badly....The Ihedioha and Co should know this is not a normal "Appeal".
I cant believe they are not ready ....what nonsense...I was actually looking forward to end of this matter today (whichever way it goes)

Wait for the full report


I'm supreme court.

1. You file your appeal
2. The respondent reply
3. The appellant reply the respondent
4. All parties file written addresses
5. JSC decided.

In this case PDP filed appeal.

APC just file in their Repsonse this morning, even in piecemeal their is need for Repsonse to that and that is the request.

Everyone know judgement cannot be today

mushystuff:
The original election results after voiding the fraudulent APC votes!

Yes

fergie001:
The Degi is a mad man.

I only posted this for those hurling insults on Odili.

She was not even the one that read the lead judgement.

She only chaired the panel.

I'm supprised at how they began to trace her to Mbaise

cckalima:
i hv read tru but u and i know that had this case being that concerning the presidential election,this same supreme court would have done all in its ambits to sustain it citing relevant sections of the law particularly as the court knows that its consequence outweighs its merit. that should have also come to play here.

What help the judgement was that They have not been sworn in.

Buhari had already been sworn in and we all know what plays out then.

Caseless:
wow! You did well. People say it's a sound judgement, but I wan to know the ground upon which a review is sought.

The ground they are seeking review bothers on using Kogi case study.

They are two separate events that never agree to each other.

In kogi case
1. Result had not been announced
2. Fake does not contest in APC governorship primary (a ground PDP could have used at the tribunal)
3. APC is at the Mercy of using their discretion to give another replacement.

In bayelsa case it was a pre-election matter.
1. Their undoing was going ahead to still present the man after the high court judgement. They were using strong head, they were advised to replaced the man. But no they went ahead


Well let's see how it plays out at the review next week

fergie001:
Yesterday's events pained The Nation newspaper.....they reported the barring of Douye at INEC HQs, most of the Bayelsa news they promoted yesterday was the violent part.


Dem go deh alright las las.....

Alaibe, withdraw your case, and be a statesman nah.

I suspect Alaibe to withdraw that case

GEJ is involved

poiZon:
Apc has looted, vandalised, destroyed so much properties ever since the judgement was delivered.
Sorry the just judgement.
Did u see how fast inec displayedthe updated result?
Can u show this forum the updatedresult from inec for imo election?

Inec had said they stick to their original Election results

They only obeyed SC because it's an order.