₦airaland Forum

Hear this shameless fools.

“The constitution is clear on this as it states the requirement for a candidate to contest the presidential election and occupy the office of the president.

“Section 131(d) provides that a person shall be qualified for election into the office of the president if he or she has been educated up to at least School Certificate level or its equivalent.

“More so, the consequence of submitting a forged document to INEC is grave.

“It, therefore, requires precise evidence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt, which the petitioners have not been able to establish,’’ the respondents said.

APC if all your response is this then start packing your load

Buhari, APC urge tribunal to dismiss Atiku, PDP’s petition on technicalities, evidential grounds


President Muhammadu Buhari and the APC have urged the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal to dismiss the petition filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate, Atiku Abubakar, challenging the February 23 general election on technicalities and evidential grounds.

The prayers formed the gamut of other requests contained in both Buhari and APC final addresses to be adopted on August 23 made available to News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) on Sunday in Abuja.

The respondents had described Abubakar’s address that urged the tribunal to sack Buhari and affirm him (Abubakar) president, as a “wild goose chase prayer’’.


They alleged that PDP erroneously allowed a candidate who was not a Nigerian by birth to contest the highest position, adding that such was an adventure that violated the provision of the Constitution.

The president and his party, therefore, prayed the tribunal to invoke Section 131 (a) of the constitution to dismiss the petition.

NAN reports that section 131 (a) of the constitution strictly holds that a person must be a citizen of Nigeria by birth to qualify to contest the office of the president.

They noted that Atiku was born on November 25, 1946 in Jada, a former Adamawa Province of Northern Cameroon before a plebiscite was conducted in 1961 that now made the enclave part of Nigeria.

The parties, therefore, alleged that Abubakar was not qualified to enter the contest as the constitution forbade him from canvassing for votes to become a president.

“We pray that the tribunal will see this constitutional reason and go ahead to uphold the election of the second respondent (Buhari) forthwith,’’ they prayed.

On evidence admitted from the petitions, the two respondents said they were empty as none had substantially proven series of the allegations made against the conduct of the election.

They explained that none of the 75 witnesses and 31, 287 exhibits which included 48 video clips proved any of the petitioners’ allegations.

They said the petitioners had tried to mislead the tribunal and public that results from the election were transmitted electronically to a central server managed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

The respondents noted that it was public knowledge that the February 23 general election was conducted with the Electoral Act of 2010 as amended.

“Moreover, the laws in Nigeria do not recognise but actually prohibit transmission of results electronically.

“Sections 52 and 78 of the Electoral Act 2010 have categorically addressed the issue.

“The only means of transmitting election results under the law are through Forms EC8 series. Form EC8A conveys results from Polling Units.

“It is only through these approved forms that election results can be challenged or proven and not through the server, imaginary or real,’’ they submitted.

The parties, therefore, submitted that the petitioners’ allegation on the use of the server by INEC to transmit results was “criminal and misguided’’.

“Atiku Abubakar and the PDP have failed in their attempt to stridently prove their petition.

“The petitioners failed woefully to establish by credible evidence the existence of the imaginary server belonging to INEC,’’ they argued.

They argued that most of the witnesses presented by the petitioners attested to the fact that they signed all the forms that contained the results of the election without coercion.

Buhari and APC, therefore, averred that such testimonies of truth from the petitioners’ witnesses further bestowed legitimacy on the outcome of the election.

On Buhari’s educational qualification, they said that the petitioners failed to adduce credible and reliable evidence to establish that he (Buhari) indeed forged his certificate.

“While it is appropriate to debunk such baseless, mendacious and spurious assertion, it suffices to bring to fore the unequivocal provision of the constitution.

“The constitution is clear on this as it states the requirement for a candidate to contest the presidential election and occupy the office of the president.

“Section 131(d) provides that a person shall be qualified for election into the office of the president if he or she has been educated up to at least School Certificate level or its equivalent.

“More so, the consequence of submitting a forged document to INEC is grave.

“It, therefore, requires precise evidence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt, which the petitioners have not been able to establish,’’ the respondents said.

Drawing reference from the constitution, the respondents defined secondary school certificate or its equivalent to mean: secondary school certificate or its equivalent, or Grade II Teacher’s certificate.

They listed others to include: City and Guides certificate or Education up to secondary school certificate level or Primary Six School Leaving Certificate or its equivalent and Service in the public or private sector in the Federation in any capacity acceptable to INEC for a minimum of 10 years.

“It is apparent that from the pleadings and evidence adduced led by the petitioners; there is no scintilla or iota of evidence to prove that the president was at the time of the election not qualified.

“It is trite that he who asserts must prove, we have clearly seen that the petitioners had failed woefully in this matter.

“In the circumstance, we urge the tribunal to dismiss the petition on the grounds of both technicalities and evidential failure and to affirm the election of the president,’’ they submitted.

NAN reports that the president, who contested the election on the platform of the APC, was announced winner having scored a total of 15 million votes as against Abubakar’s 11,262,978 votes.

NAN further reports that the Justice Mohammed Garba-led five-man panel awaits the parties to adopt their final addresses on August 21 preparatory to judgment.

https://tribuneonlineng.com/buhari-apc-urge-tribunal-to-dismiss-atiku-pdp-petition-on-technicalities-evidential-grounds/

Breaking News:

Presidential Election Tribunal, Abba Kyari in trouble for procuring Fake Cambridge Statement of result for President Buhari

The Chief of Staff (CoS) to President Muhammadu Buhari is trouble for procuring fake Cambridge statement of result in aid of his boss’s defense at the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal.

One patriotic Lawyer, Mr. Kalu Kalu Agu, Esq., after series of investigations at the prestigious Cambridge university in the United Kingdom, discovered that the said statement of result was fake and has petitioned Mr. Abba Kyari to the Metropolitan Police. The letter with Ref N0; Nr VE261478815GB was received and signed for by T.GAMBLE Esq of the Metropolitan Police at 8.52 am on Friday,16-08-2019

Mr. Abba Kyari, in his desperation to support his boss, employed the services of black marketeers (aka Oluwole), to procure the said fake statement of result (as attached), which was presented to the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal by the lead counsel to the 2nd Respondent, Chief Wole Olanipekun.

During cross examination at the trial, Mr. Kyari confirmed to the court that he personally signed and collected the said fake statement of result on behalf of his boss, President Muhammadu Buhari on the 18th of July 2019, after the conclusion of the Presidential Election on February 23, 2019.

He also confirmed to the court that the purported Cambridge assessment international education certified statement of result was not listed on President Buhari’s Curriculum Vitae he submitted to the 1st Respondent, INEC before the election.

Recall that this same fake Cambridge assessment statement of result was presented to the WAEC Deputy Registrar, Dr. Adewumi, who was Subpoenaed to testify for President Buhari at the Presidential Tribunal, Mr. Adewumi informed the court that he does not recognize the statement of result, even though on the paper, it reads that it was done in collaboration with WASC.

Asked by the Petitioners’s counsel if the statement of result is in tandem with WAEC? He responded that he does not know how and where the document emanated from. That his signature is not on the document and that the document does not carry WAEC authorization.

Iamgrey5:
Oga PDP will also make similar prayer before their closing remark.


It is standard procedure.

Is this there acclaimed robbust response.

Shm

And replaced with what.

CTC collected by Kyari right.

Una no serious

Buhari and his party also asked the tribunal to reject a separate set of 33 documents, which included the Certified True Copies of Form CF001 (personal particulars) submitted by Buhari to the Independent National Electoral Commission as the presidential candidate of his party, other INEC documents and some newspaper reports.

Tuniski,
ChristianNorth

See why This people did mot call witnesses

Buhari, APC want Atiku’s 28,000 exhibits expunged

President Muhammadu Buhari and his All Progressives Congress have asked the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal to expunge from its records over 28,000 result sheets of the February 23, 2019 election in 10 states tendered by the Peoples Democratic Party and its candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar.

They also urged the Justice Mohammed Garba-led tribunal of five judges to reject the testimony of the petitioners’ 40th, 59th and 60th witnesses.

Atiku’s spokesperson, Mr Segun Showunmi, was the 40th witness; David Njorga from Kenya, who was described by the petitioners as their “expert witness,” was the PW 59; while Joseph Gbenga, a data analyst was the PW 60.


Buhari and his party also asked the tribunal to reject a separate set of 33 documents, which included the Certified True Copies of Form CF001 (personal particulars) submitted by Buhari to the Independent National Electoral Commission as the presidential candidate of his party, other INEC documents and some newspaper reports.

Among the 28,428 documents, whose admissibility was being challenged by Buhari and the APC, are 28,395 certified true copies of polling unit, local government, ward and state result sheets of 10 states.


The states are Yobe (1,732 result sheets), Kebbi (2,106), Borno (3,472), Kano (5,806), Bauchi (3,599), Katsina (3,378), Jigawa (3,162), Kaduna (3,335A), Zamfara (eight) and Niger (1,797).

Buhari and the APC prayers, urging the tribunal not to act on the documents, are contained in their separate objections to the admissibility of the petitioners’ documents earlier admitted conditionally as exhibits by the tribunal.

Copies of the filings by the 2nd and 3rd respondents (Buhari and APC) obtained by The PUNCH on Tuesday were filed alongside their separate final addresses in which they urged the tribunal to dismiss Atiku’s petition against Buhari for lacking in merit.


The tribunal had fixed August 21 for parties to present their closing arguments in respect of the petition challenging the victory of Buhari and the APC at the February 23, 2019 poll.

APC’s lawyer, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), urged the tribunal to “expunge” the documents from the record of proceedings on the grounds that they were “wrongly admitted in evidence” when they “are legally inadmissible.”

He contended that while some of them “are documentary hearsay evidence that should not have been admitted by the honourable court in the first place,” others were inadmissible on the grounds that they were tendered from the bar despite being disputed by the APC.


On the evidence of the petitioners’ witnesses numbers 40, 59 and 60, Buhari’s lawyer, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), said their testimonies were in violation of the March 6, 2019 order of the tribunal, which dismissed the petitioners’ request to be granted access to an alleged server in which they claimed INEC stored the authentic results of the last presidential election.

Showunmi (PW40) had tendered some video evidence to prove the petitioners’ case of the existence of the server.


Njorga (PW 59) also gave evidence and tendered his report on the existence of the said server, while Gbenga (PW 60) also gave evidence and tendered his report of the analysis of the results of the election in 11 states.

Olanipekun faulted the evidence of the witnesses which he argued emerged “in express violation of a subsisting order of court, same germinates in stark abuse of the process of this honourable court.”

https://www.punchng.com/buhari-apc-want-atikus-28000-exhibits-expunged/amp/

OAUTemitayo:
You go dey alright sir

I'm alright

OAUTemitayo:
Google.com sir

Seems your own certificate is also from WEAC

tuniski:
Keyamo doesn't need to engage in media trial the matter has already been argued at the tribunal.

It is no longer in the hands of the litigants neither the petitioners nor the defendants.

All this media attempt at retrial ain't going to work.

Keyamo had 100% chance to make his defense at the trubunal, why?

He's afraid to lie under oath

But he chicken out as a Senior Advocate of Noise and Nuisance

OAUTemitayo:
A sensible person knows that is a mistake.
But since you are... Yee who slapped me?

Okay then its safe to say you're OAUTemitoya.

Onranu

Breaking News: Buhari wrote WEAC not WAEC; Keyamo


So its WEAC afterall, no problem

A whole shia-man Oshi-omo-ole

Boris Johnson appoints British-Nigerian as minister
Elections: Presidential candidate withdraws, supports Atiku

The All Progressives Congress (APC) has criticised former Vice President Atiku Abubakar for making public statements on issues, which constitutionally, it noted, should be reserved for the duly elected head of government or his designees.

Mr Abubakar, who was the presidential candidate of the main opposition PDP in 2019, had earlier congratulated Boris Johnson on his emergence as the new British Prime Minister and also his nomination of a Nigerian as minister.

But an irate APC, on Monday criticised Mr Abubakar for acting as a ‘shadow president’ and issuing statements which were under the purview of President Muhammadu Buhari or his designated appointees.
The ruling APC said Mr Abubakar demonstrated a lack of regard for the sovereignty of the office of the President and Nigerian government through condescending statements.

“He has made several of such statements regarding the activities of the Nigerian military, issues of national security, and international relations,” the party said.

Its full statement is reproduced below:
As a Party, we would have thought that Alh. Atiku who in the past occupied such high office as the country’s vice president would clearly understand the workings of government, particularly as it bothers on national security, foreign policy and our international engagement. We have noted Alh. Atiku’s incessant habits of releasing statements on public issues as if he were an alternative President of this country and with a clear intention to undermine President Muhammadu Buhari and the APC-led government.

In recent times, Alh. Atiku has demonstrated lack of regard for the sovereignty of the office of the President and Nigerian government through condescending statements. He has made several of such statements regarding the activities of the Nigerian military, issues of national security, and international relations.

The latest of such statements is the one he made on the emergence of Mr. Boris Johnson as Prime Minister of Britain even when our duly elected President, who has the responsibility of making an official statement on such matter, has made the position of our country known. We note with serious concern that Alh. Atiku has been throwing himself around as a shadow President of Nigeria. We would like to state clearly that such position could only be found under the parliamentary system; it does not exist under the Presidential system of government that we practice in Nigeria.

Alh. Atiku, like every Nigerian citizen, should understand that being a candidate for an elective office, including that of the President, does not confer on him a sovereign status. Alh. Atiku’s continuous portrayal of himself as a shadow President under our system borders on felony and makes him a patent impostor.

There can only be one democratically elected and legitimate government at a time in this country. That clearly is the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari. It is important to remind Alh. Atiku that issues of national security, foreign policy and international engagements are not matters to be exploited to achieve mischievous political ends.

We reiterate that Alh. Atiku has lost the 2019 presidential election and it would be unhelpful to him to continue to make a mockery of our country. We expect Alh. Atiku to quickly address himself to the stark reality of his loss and move on. Our laws are clear on all acts of criminalities, in this case, a clear case of felony. Nigerians expect that the enforcement of relevant laws should apply to every Nigerian, irrespective of class and status. This government would not be found wanting where it is required to take decisive actions.

https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/top-news/343996-atiku-usurping-buharis-responsibilities-apc.html

tuniski:
Chai Chai. The Buharideens and some highly insultive ones amongst them will be insultive instead of discerning.

The heat is on.

Buhari and buharideens the lying gangs

And APC BMO keep shooting themselves in the leg.

Bi iro ba lo logun odun

Tuniski
ChristianiNorth
deji68
FaraAideed

Contrary to the claim that Buhari presented CTC (Certified True Copy) of His certificate.

And its been peddle about by APC amd BMO.

Find below the Ceritify True Copy that wa presented at the Tribunal Today.

Cc: lalasticlala,

Afamed:
Did you find it difficult to understand simple grammar. Accreditation data . How is accreditation similar to transmission of electoral votes and results?. Don't be silly

As usual insult is your second name. Go ahead.

Are you okay now.

Afamed:
Did you find it difficult to understand simple grammar. Accreditation data . How is accreditation similar to transmission of electoral votes and results?. Don't be silly

O ma to ye e, pele

engineerboat:
Tuniski, ChristianNorth,

No wonder INEC chicken out of PEPT

We now know Why INEC go the honourable way

But Mr Agwe, in his oral testimony, said that INEC ICT unit monitored the process centrally in a National Situation Control Room where Presiding Officers transmitted accreditation data from smart card reader to a “back end”

The witness, who was also cross examined by Obinna Adindu, counsel to INEC, said that the commission made a survey of the various places where elections would hold to ascertain the strength of various network services and provided two sim cards of the strongest networks.

“We provided spare card reader machines so that if one failed, the other could be uploaded,” he said.

Tuniski, ChristianNorth,

No wonder INEC chicken out of PEPT

The senator for Anambra South, Ifeanyi Ubah, on Saturday failed in his bid to stop an ICT expert from the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from testifying against him at the Anambra Election Petitions Tribunal sitting in Awka.

The tribunal had subpoenaed INEC ICT Directorate upon the application of the petitioner, Chris Uba of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), to provide some materials and testify in their matter.

When the INEC staff, Ama Agwe, appeared on the witness box on July 24, counsel to Mr Ubah and INEC, both respondents in the petition, objected and prayed the tribunal to reject his documents and not allow him to testify.

They argued that he was not among those originally listed to testify in the petition and that his written statement on oath was not done within the 21 days permitted by the electoral act.

George Igbokwe, counsel to Mr Uba, reminded the tribunal that the witness was a product of court order and that not allowing him would amount to the denial of fair hearing.

Mr Igbokwe said the objections should be discountenanced and that the court should not reverse itself.

Ruling on the matter at the resumed hearing of consolidated petition No. EPT/AN/SEN/11/2019 on Saturday, the tribunal held that subpoena was a court order similar to a writ of summons and must be allowed to testify.

The ruling which was read by Sunday Olorundahunsi, said that the objection could not be sustained as the argument of listing and front loading witnesses and evidences were not possible because INEC could not have easily deposed written statement against itself as a respondent in the petition.

The tribunal further said that the witness being a product of an order of court must be allowed to testify as the court could not approbate and reprobate at the same time.

“Tribunal is of the view that the INEC ICT Director be allowed to testify,” it ruled.

In his testimony, Mr Agwe, an Assistant Director, said he was in court on the authority of Director of INEC ICT Department, who was summoned by the tribunal.

The witness tendered documentary evidence, including Smart Card Reader accreditation data for all polling units in Anambra South with accompanying certificate of compliance.

Others were manual for election official 2019 and Regulations and Guidelines for conduct of election 2019.

During his cross examination, Dee Nwigwe, counsel to Mr Ubah, cited portion of the documents tendered which provided for alternative means of accreditation of voters in the event that smart card reader malfunctioned or did not have service.

Mr Nwigwe told the witness to provide evidence that there was service in the entire senatorial zone or that he interviewed the Presiding Officers that worked in the district to ascertain that all went well with functionality of smart card reader machines.

But Mr Agwe, in his oral testimony, said that INEC ICT unit monitored the process centrally in a National Situation Control Room where Presiding Officers transmitted accreditation data from smart card reader to a “back end”.

The witness, who was also cross examined by Obinna Adindu, counsel to INEC, said that the commission made a survey of the various places where elections would hold to ascertain the strength of various network services and provided two sim cards of the strongest networks.

“We provided spare card reader machines so that if one failed, the other could be uploaded,” he said.



Three other PDP witnesses, who worked as PDP agents in Nnewi Ichi, Umudim and Uruagu testified to bringing the total of petitioner’s witnesses so far entertained to eight.

The Chairman of the Tribunal, Thelma Okara, adjourned the matter untilto July 29 for further hearing. (NAN)

https://www.premiumtimesng.com/regional/ssouth-east/343514-inec-ict-expert-testifies-against-ubah-at-anambra-election-tribunal.html

deji68:
you are right..... and their submision like

Atiku witnesses ;We transmitted results
INEc will be they didnt quote the code , or didnt see the server so we dont have one (IT dierector was suppose to testify)

Atiku : false entries in 11 state(Exhibit 500000 CTC result)
INEC: we stand by the results declared(no Results sheets submitted by Inec).

Atiku; Video and other internal doc.
INEC; No doc submitted to disprove this.

e.tc....
I think INEC has nothing to lose by not putting a robust defense, if they rely on PDP witnesse , i smell trouble for APC except they make a good case.

APC as usual will not call witness, just to save face may present few but will be there undoing as well

muykem:
They will do that by writing submission. That's not require witness. They will rely on Atiku witnesses that election was manually collated and server is alien to our laws. The other aspect raised by petitioner didn't concern INEC.

But INEC can cancel result in SE, SS, SW, MB, Because card reader could not authenticate voters, but allow the results stands in NE, NW were card readers were not even used right?
3 gbosa for you

muykem:
This is what I said here on nairaland and some people are insulting me. All Atiku witnesses testified in favour of INEC. The worst is the so called star witness.

Which witness support INEC

Okoroawusa:
so a website is a server?

Can you have a website without a server.

Cloud based,
Physical component server

It now depeneds on hownyou want your information harvested

deji68:
so INEC dont need to counter the claims by their staff that they transmitted results ?.internal memo and Training material are they their documents . They 11 contested state with false entries, no collation officer to testify abi?.....well make we wait for the APC and Bubu defence

You know propaganda when you see Zombies runnig their mouth its in their blood.

They keep shouting INEC server as if server is the only ground here.

Server is not even up to 1% of the entire petition.

But APC as usual will dwell on non-issue

tuniski:
Anyone who can't be consistent on identity is suspect in thought.

Don't mind him.

He keep running his mouth shamelessly.

tuniski:
Whatever the outcome Atiku would have done well for our democracy. I respect his democratic credential.

INEC no witness is highly expected.

Bringing up witnesses will be like nailing their coffin the more

iloveyou82:
you and i knew atiku was not the right candidate of pdp, you had no choice than to support him

Are you then the right candidate.

You as well tell Buhari not to show up any defence.