₦airaland Forum

OLAADEGBU:
What is my motive, reporting what others wouldn't report?

OLAADEGBU:
How does that justify the alleged criminality of this so called Bishop?

OLAADEGBU:
Is this not Bishop who prophesied that Obi would be the next President?

Penguin2:
Hmmm!

You mean Vanguard and other reputable platforms reported fake news?

Has he refuted the report?🤔🧐

Penguin2:
Tell H.orny of Ife to concentrate on taking more wives for his restless rod rather than advising Obi to accept illegality.

Same rubbish Adeboye said.

Is that these guys didn’t see the obvious irregularities in the election or their bigotry has beclouded their sense of reasoning?

blacknp:
Justice Feintline how did you come to the conclusion that Bola Tinubu did not meet the requirements of the constitution?

According to Keyamo , it would be impossible to amend laws and rules of court to accommodate such an idea.

The Minister of State for Labour and Employment, Festus Keyamo has said that “those calling for quick determination of election petitions are plainly ignorant or crassly mischievous”.

Keyamo said it would be impossible to amend laws and rules of court to accommodate such an idea.

He made the assertion on Sunday in a post via his verified Twitter handle.

The statement followed calls by some Nigerians, asking the court to ensure speedy determination of election petitions before it, especially the presidential election.

Some had also argued that May 29 swearing-in should be stopped pending the determination of presidential election petitions.

But Keyamo said “Those who think by such a call they are doing the Petitioners any good, do not realise that they are, in fact doing a great harm to the cases of the Petitioners.”

He wrote, “THOSE CALLING FOR A QUICK DETERMINATION OF ELECTION PETITIONS BEFORE MAY 29TH UNDER OUR PRESENT LAWS ACTUALLY WANT TO DESTROY THE CASES OF THE PETITIONERS.

“Those calling for the determination of the Election Petitions BEFORE the swearing-in ceremonies on MAY 29th under our present electoral laws and Rules of Court and/or procedure are either plainly ignorant or crassly mischievous.

“In future, it is possible to amend our laws and rules of court to accommodate such an idea, but it is clearly IMPOSSIBLE under our present circumstances.

“Those who think by such a call they are doing the Petitioners any good, do not realise that they are, in fact doing a great harm to the cases of the Petitioners.

“It is the Petitioners that need more TIME to prove their cases and not necessarily the defendants. That is why the Petitioners are given 21 days to file and the defendants have 14 days to respond. And the Petitioners have a further 7 days to reply, making a total of 30 days as against the 14 days of the Respondents.

“It follows that in leading evidence in court/Tribunal in support of the Petitions, the Petitioners would also take more time. It is more arduous to prove an Election Petition than to defend it.

“If these characters say a single point (let’s say the FCT 25 percent storm-in-a-teacup issue) should be set down for determination immediately, would the Petitioners’ lawyers agree to withdraw and abandon all other issues raised in their Petition and proceed only with that issue?

“Will they take that risk? Ask them privately. They know better. This is because the rules of Election Petitions do not allow Petitioners to prove their cases piecemeal.

“A Petitioner cannot pursue a single point up to the Supreme Court and after losing, return to the Tribunal or Court and say he/she/it wants to now prove other aspects of the case.

“Even that single point alone CANNOT be determined by the Supreme Court BEFORE MAY 29th because of the time given by the rules for parties to file their Notices of Appeal and exchange their briefs.

“It is indeed only the Respondent that can raise a preliminary objection that can determine the Petition in limine (that is, at the threshold). Even at that, the rules allow the Court/Tribunal to take the objection together with the Petition itself and give one judgment at the end in order to save time.

“So, this is a free advice to the advocates of pre-May 29th determination of the Election Petitions: they are doing the cases of their Principals (the Petitioners) great harm.

“They should realise that just as we say ‘justice delayed is justice denied’, we also say ‘justice rushed is justice crushed’.”

NLFPMOD

Keyamo said it would be impossible to amend laws and rules of court to accommodate such an idea.

odigbosky:
My polling unit is in a military Barack and there are two of such in that Barack

MetaPhysical:
Your Illiteracy drips everywhere.

They are talking of military barracks, you interject with military formation.

Do you know difference between barracks and formation? Olodo!

Exc2000:
Will you shut the fvck up and listen to correction

Soldiers, And all Armed forces do not vote and no polling unit in Military barracks


.

Pierohandsome:
Oga I am a barrack boy. Military men don't vote, neither do they cast votes in military barracks. Polling units may be stationed close to military barracks,but not in the barracks

Pierohandsome:
They don't cast votes in military barracks,neither do military men vote.

I am obedient,but this claim is false

GeneralDae:
I think you are just trolling here.