₦airaland Forum

seunmsg:
It is not just fake, it makes no sense.

Because your pay master keep giving you half baked news.

Here is what Atiku presented to the Appeal and stop ranting

Tospringe:
I was going through the Presidential election result that was released by Atiku's legal team this evening which was said to be hacked from INEC server. My attention was first directed to Anambra state where Buhari got 333, 710 votes. How could that be possible ? Peter Obi's state ? The heart beat of Igbo land. Thesame state where Buhari got 17,926 votes in 2015 ? So what gave rise to over 1800% vote increment in 2019 ?
I now took my time to do the breakdown of number of votes Buhari got from South East:

Anambra: 333,710 votes
Abia: 198,391 votes
Ebonyi: 291,846 votes
Enugu: 267,821 votes
Imo: 423,801 votes
TOTAL: 1,515,569 votes.

From the analysis, it shows 1,515,569 easterners voted for Buhari. How could that be possible ? Same Buhari that is always vilified by the Igbos on social media. ? Same Buhari that was rejected by Ohanenze Ndigbo ? Same Buhari that has been labeled an arch-enemy of Igbos? Same Buhari that Nnamdi Kanu openly told his followers not to vote for ? Same Buhari that that experienced poor turnouts during his campaign in South East. ? Is it not surprising ?

Let's take a look at how South East voted for Buhari in 2015:

Enugu: 14,157 votes
Anambra: 17,926 votes
Abia: 13,394 votes
Imo:133,253 votes
Ebonyi: 19,518 votes
TOTAL: 198,248 votes

So Buhari's popularity grew by over 1800% votes in South East within the space of 4 years!!!!

MY CONCLUSION: Atiku's server result is fake. I assume the result was prepared prior to election based on their Forecast, because no sensible person would believe that Buhari amassed over 1.5 million votes in South East.

Cc: OAM4J , Mynd44

Zombies is a deadly disease

Ratello:
don't kill that boy my engineer

The Boy need some Factorial!!!! Permutation to reset his uncoordinated comments

garfield1:
Ede people? Up oyetola

How I wish you are the one representing Oyetola Yesterday at the Appeal.


You will do a better job than Wole Olanipekun and Akin Olujimi Did Yesterday,

But surprisingly, your Job stops at ranting on Nairaland, while those that matter make statements inside the court

garfield1:
Seems you dont know what pain me.i cant imagine what you are going through after your party was destroyed in your own state

This Boy, why not stop displaying this your nauseating comment on this forum,


You're daily sounding incoherent and childish

garfield1:
Seems you are the one with problems.how am i sure you weren't the one that wrote that rubbish? I still remember how you struggled after the humiliation of fayose.

Tramadol IS DANGEROUS FOR YOUR HEALTH BOY, Stop taking it, it will not do you any good


Anyway, you will be okay las, las

Johnnyessence:
he's just a loser jare, he will come again after the appeal court affirm the tribunal judgement and post his trash again.

The boy is getting nauseating on Nairaland with his half baked comments

Ajala

Private visit indeeed

Johnnyessence:
No peace for the wicked.

The wicked are already when no one is even pursuing them

garfield1:
Server result cannot be relied upon as being authentic, when card readers were not used in some polling unit. I sensed PDP hacked inec's server to input those figures. Even in my polling unit card reader result was more than the ones mark on the register. Many po made mistakes when using the card reader, some didn't even use it at all, I attest to this. Can PDP say the same strategy should be used for the just elected governors? Therefore, only the result sheet(form EC8A) is valid.

Is it a halfbaked san like uzoukwu that will do the legal killing? Did you see how pdp were protesting at inec office today? Wake up and face realities

This boy

Why did INEC then says, polling unit results were cancelled because they did not allow Card reader

dunkem21:
This report is consistent not minding it's partisanship. You can check engineerboat's thread yesterday and notice the similarities.

They will still say engineerboat is PDP.

I don't really understand them, Honestly.

What part of the report were not said by Wole Olanipekun.

What aprt of the report were not said by Olujimi

What part of the report were not said by Ikpeazu

What part of the interjection by the Appeal panel did not happen really.

this people should get life jare

garfield1:
Always concurring to nonsense

Stop creating uncoordinated Speech and submission like Wole, Olujimi and Yusuf Ali.

I so much respect The TRIO but this days seems age is telling on them or how do I put.

Honestly you need to see how Yusuf Ali was sweating yesterday under AC and How Wole was trying for find his footing when his line of Appeal where been puncture even stylishly by some of the Appeal Panelist.

If you were there you will understand better,

but since you are not there let me leave you to your situation as it is.

don't let me compound your problem the more

garfield1:
I just saw another loophole in the tribunal rulings.cancellations or voiding of votes can only happen if non compliance was established.inec's innocent mistake or genuine error in 17 units are not under non compliance.therefore,the tribunal erred in voiding votes.
The elections in 17 units were satisfactory and accepted by even pdp agents.the only problem was mistakes in the result sheets.so why the cancellations?

Which PDP stop talking trash again
Hear from your APC witness at thr Tribunal

[quoe] He also told Dr Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), counsel to the petitioners that he was not at the collation centres in the local governments and as such did not see the persons who made corrections on the various Forms EC8A, B and C.


He informed that during collation of results at the state collation centre, presiding officers from the polling units were not allowed in.

He said that “Only the local government officers were allowed.

“Polling unit agents of parties were not present when the decision to cancel result of seven polling units was made”.[/quote]1. Why we're PO not allowed in
2. Why we're PO agent not allowed in
3. Does the RO Have the authority and power to unilaterally deduct votes without permisions from concerned party


Abeg o boy shift one side

NgeneUkwenu:
I wonder why no reputable newsprint carries that hallucinated story from those unrepentant buffoons.

Las las you go dey alright.

Were have you been from morning.

Don't worry the nation news paper will soon carry it

garfield1:
A biased post from a core adeleke fan you mean? Backstreet propaganda.up oyetola.

I've told you to stop repeating whole Olanipekun mistake

Lay down tour contrary report

youngestuk:
So when will they announce the final judgement??

Going by the 2010 constitution amendment

The appeal have 60 days from the day of Tribunal Judgement.

Judgement was given 22nd March

Going by that, 30 days is gone ALREADY

youngestuk:
So when will they announce the final judgement??

When the Appeal panel are ready with their judgement

9jahotblog:
Osun Guber Appeal: Oyetola, Respondents Lawyers' Ridiculed in Court

*You are not making any sense in your submission, Judge to Wole Olanipekun

*You should have Defended allegation of Doctored results at Tribunal,Judge to Yusuf Ali

*Dont Twist or Mislead us on Cross Appeal,Judge to Akin Olujinmi

The Appeal against the ruling of Osun governorship election Tribunal today took off on a sad note for the Appellants namely Gboyega Oyetola, the All Progressive Congress and the Independent National Electoral Commission INEC. From the three Appeals to the cross Appeal by Senator Ademola Adeleke , it was a rolling show of Judicial bashing for Oyetola,APC and INEC.

The Appellants' Counsel staggered from one error to the other amidst muddling of presentations and out of context legal submissions, prompting the judges to on several occasions intervene to correct and even frown at obvious misrepresentations, misinformation and irrelevant arguments by the Counsel for Appellants.

As the three Appeals and cross Appeal proceeded one after the other, the counsels to the Appellants and the cross Respondents descended into legal confusion with even the legal juggernauts among them, Wole Olanipekun SAN, Akin Olunjinmi SAN and Yusuf Alli SAN engaging in what the judges considered to be legal ramblings and obvious irrelevances.

At today's sitting ,the judges had reason to chide and call to order the appellant's counsels for more than 12 times such that at a point ,one of the judges exploded:"we are not making sense of your submission at all.

"You tend to be everywhere .You are citing pages and pages and we are not getting the point you are making. You need to be more concise ",the panel chairperson, Justice J.H. Sankey pointedly told Wole Olanipekun SAN.

As though ruffled by the calm disposition and legal intellectualism displayed by respondents' legal team comprising of Dr Emeka Ikpeazu,SAN,Dr Ananaba,SAN,N.O.Oke,SAN ,Ogunwumiju,SAN,the counsels to the appellants got trapped in many legal holes and on many occasions, the judges had to pull them out to safe the integrity of the learned silks.

The proceedings had taken off on a good note with the panel chairperson promising accelerated hearing. Senator Ademola Adeleke and Gboyega Oyetola were sitting facing each other both wearing white with Adeleke's white garments reinforced by that of his deputy,Albert Adeogun. In a very tense seven hour hearing punctuated by only 10 minutes recess, the sitting commenced with the first appeal.

To the shock and apprehension of the chamber, Olanipekun launched the first Appeal apparently focussing only on line of argument - that the Judge who delivered the majority ruling at the lower court was not present on a particular day of the hearing. Scrambling to cite authorities to back up his claim, it became obvious that the Appellants have no defence against the substance of the Tribunal judgement.

The respondent's counsel, Ikpeazu SAN responding on this point affirmed that the issue in question is about conflict of court records as Justice Obiorah was cited in the proceedings of the said date even though he did not sign. To nail Olanipekun who had built a castle in the air ,Ikpeazu declared that the Appellants should have filed an affidavit to inquire from the judge and to clarify the conflict in the court records. The issue he said cannot be simply settled by assumption of the appellant's Lawyers. Justice Obiorah he said should be given fair hearing to know exactly what happen on the said day.

Ikpeazu SAN by raising the issue of conflict in court records and the need for affidavits to get clarification from the Judge punctured the major plank of appellant's case. All efforts to reset the matter failed as the respondent submitted several authorities to prove that the issue of a Judge's absence cannot be determined without hearing from the judge.

On the second Appeal, Olanipekun run into troubled water when he posited that the respondent, Ademola Adeleke is seeking to be declared winner on the basis of September 22 poll which has been declared inconclusive. The Tribunal he said exceeded its authority by reframing reliefs and granting such adding that the
petitioner did not plead categorically.

Plunging further into self deviced legal trap,Olujinmi posited that the respondent attacked September 27 poll to win the September 22nd election,affirming that the respondent did not plead non-compliance in September 22 election .He noted that non compliance of September 27 cannot be used to gain advantage on September 22,adding that the Tribunal relied on certified true copies of forms ec8a dumped on the court to compare and take decision.

The legal sophistry and manipulative proposition by Olujinmi was immediately buried by Dr Ikpeazu who methodically and calmly demolished the legal lies built and packaged by Olujinmi. Ikpeazu SAN submitted that the APGA case cited by Olujinmi is not applicable to the Osun case. In the APGA case,there was no return on the election,so the court held that the election where there was no return cannot be adjudicated upon.

In the case of Osun,he said there was a return with Senator Adeleke winning by majority votes and satisfying the local government spread conditional requirements to be declared. The respondents submission he said was that on the basis of September 22nd poll which was announced by the electoral commission, Ademola Adeleke should have been declared Winner . In other words ,the rerun was illegal as the constitutional requirement has been and satisfied by one of the contestants.

Ikpeazu declared further that contrary to Olujinmi's submission ,the respondent pleaded both September 22nd and 27th polls in the petition. Citing relevant authorities ,he argued that no election is complete until a winner is declared. Hence,the respondent filed the petitions after the violently rigged rerun.

In what appears like a legal lecture on election petition,Ikpeazu passionately argued and submit with judges taken copious notes and with Oyetola on the VIP desk looking worryingly at the exceptional brilliance of the respondents lawyer.

On the third Appeal,the INEC lawyer,Yusuf Ali was confronted with probably one of his worst legal outing. First his presentation was devoid of seriousness to the extent that the panel chairman jokingly said the learned silk is only entertaining the court.

He hinged his submission on the fact that the tribunal was wrong to have held that INEC should have called witnesses to defend the doctoring and mutilation of results sheets. He struggled and laboured to proof that form EC8A is not very important and that ballot accounting is irrelevant in an election.

As he was making his submission,the judges were questioning his lines of thought even before the respondents reacted .One of the judges questioned him about why INEC failed to react to the many allegations at the trial stage during the life of the suit at the lower court. He responded by saying the burden of proof is on the Petitioner. At that point,a judge fired at him and said: "you should have vigorously defended the allegations against INEC at the tribunal"

Another judge told Ali SAN that INEC should have invited witnesses and also explained why the results sheets were altered.

Responding Ipkeazu affirmed that there was no contradiction in the ruling of the tribunal over the issue of non-compliance. He said the burden of proof shift only after the accused has made his submission. In this case he said INEC failed to explain the disparity between certified true copies and pink copies of ec8a which are results from the wards.

On the issue of powers of the tribunal to cancel and declare results, Olujinmi failed in his bid to prove that the tribunal has no power despite citing the ruling of the court. He even produced a 2015 version of the electoral act ,positing that the court ruling by Justice Kolawole striking that section 140 (2) of the electoral act has no effect. Olanipekun added his own by saying the ruling is overtaken by events.

Midway,the judges questioned the submission before Ikpeazu jailed the coffin by asserting that as at today ,the ruling and the judgement remains especially as there has been no appeal against it. The panel Judges even concurred with the respondent's submission.

A major high point of the hearing today was the hearing on the cross Appeal when the counsel to Adeleke ,Kehinde Ogunwumiju,SAN made his presentation submitting that the court should add six 6 witnesses rejected at the tribunal and add their testimony to the hearing. He submitted that granting the prayers will increase the margin of win of his client, Adeleke.

In a major show of legal mastery,the SAN took on Wole Olanipekun,Akin Olujinmi and Yusif Ali,knocking lives out of their presentations and submitting that the panel should allow the cross Appeal.

By the time the hearing closed around 4:30pm, it was clear that the appeal has probably failed and that the cross Appeal has strong prospects. Olanipekun left the premises frowning while Oyetola hurriedly left without speaking with the press. Ajibola Ajibola Bashir was clearly rattled while the well mobilised APC members left in clearly very sad mood.

Senator Ademola Adeleke was thronged by well wishers.

The names of the panel members are J H Sankey, A. D. Yahaya, I G Mbaba, Justice Akeju and BG Sanga

Imole Media Team

That is how the whole event went today.

Judgement day awaited.


Seem most lawyers now understating Wole and Olujimi antics

Today's firework in SUMMARY above



It wasn't funny at all

dbestuncle:
Pls was there a ruling or adjournment till a later date.
pls we need updates

Appeal hearing ended already.

Awaiting judgement day

To be communicated later

garfield1:
And apc is about to clean the mess.if you read the judgment of the tribunal,inec explained but the tribunal were not convinced.obiora was absent on one of those days.

Clean which mess.

It's a pity you don't see Your Yusuf Ali sweating under AC tying to gather point on why INEC fail to call witness and why RO unilaterally cancel votes without consulting the Po concerns and the party concern.

O boy stop disturbing this thread

garfield1:
He wont.he has passed a message which you cant decode.he abandons his threads once he knows that pdp are losing.you are new so you won't know.

Cover your face in shame, just like Woke Olanipekun and Akinn Olujimi with Yusuf Ali are sweating under AC here at the Appeal court.

Zombiee no get part 2

garfield1:
He wont.he has passed a message which you cant decode.he abandons his threads once he knows that pdp are losing.you are new so you won't know.

You have a problem.

So you report when there is break

Find something better to do.

Chief Olanipekun submitted that the Cross Appeal is putting something on nothing as overvoting cannot be established without the voters register

Rulings on the Notice of Preliminary Objection to the Cross- Appeal reserved and to be read with the main judgment

Chief Akin Olujinmi SAN also moved APC Preliminary Objection to the Cross-Appeal

Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN moved the preliminary objection to the cross-appeal.

“The party on appeal must show an element of miscarriage of justice”, Dr. Ikpeazu stated

Ikpeazu further argued that the Appellants failed to show how the alleged absence of Justice Obiora affected the substance of the judgment.

“In a case where over 100 witnesses testified, they have nor proved how the evidence of two witnesses that testified on the day they contended that Justice Obiora was not around, rendered the entire judgment of the tribunal a nullity.

Dr. Ikpeazu butteressing his earlier argument stated that the appellant have failed to adduce any cogent evidence that Justice Obiora was not there”.

DR. Ikpeazu further argued that going by processes before the court, while Justice Obiora’s name was listed on the record of proceeding for February 6, his signature was however missing on the signature page.

“Looking at totality of the proceedings, there is obviously a conflict which cannot be resolved without affidavit evidence. It cannot be resolved against a judge who has not been given the opportunity to explain.

“It is not a matter that an inference can be drawn from the Bar that the Judge was not there.

9jahotblog:
engineerboat, please update us on pdp cross appeal in the appeal court.

Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN, in his cross-appeal insisted that the appellants failed to adduce any evidence to prove their allegation that Justice Obiora did not attend all the proceedings.