Misterone's Posts
Nairaland Forum › Misterone's Profile › Misterone's Posts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 (of 125 pages)
*Peter Obi's Petition At The Election Tribunal Is Bereft Of Statutory Allegations:* By: *Barrister Obol Okoi Obono-Obla* I have read a copy of the Petition filed on 21 March 2023 by the Presidential candidate of the Labour Party, Peter Obi before the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal, Abuja. In this write, I will only dwell on two issues raised in the Petition. They are the alleged No-qualifications of the APC presidential candidate, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, and the Vice President's running mate Senator Kashim Shettima. The petitioner (Peter Obi) alleged that the President-Elect is linked to drugs or narcotics. I will quickly submit that linkage to drugs is not one of the disqualification criteria spelled out in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,1999 (as amended). Before you can be barred from contesting you must have suffered a conviction that is related to dishonesty ten years before the election you want to contest. In the case under reference it is alleged that the case took place in 1993 which is 20 years ago. The election Asiwaju Bola Tinubu contested took place on 25 February 2023 more than 20 years after the event complained about. Section 137 (e) of the 1999 constitution is a perfect answer to ground one of the Petition. It provides as follows: He has been convicted and sentenced for an offense involving dishonesty or he has been found guilty of contravention of the Code of Conduct. Assuming the offense in which the President-Elect amounts to a criminal conviction, ten years have elapsed. If the conviction took place in 1993, this is almost 20 years. The Constitution contemplates the conviction to have taken place ten years from the date of the election in which the candidate participated. A forfeiture proceeding that doesn't end in the conviction of the defendant is not a conviction in the eye of the law. I do not think that a forfeiture proceeding is a criminal proceeding contemplated by the Constitution. A forfeiture proceeding is a non-conviction proceeding. There are two types of forfeiture proceedings. They are civil and criminal. Civil forfeiture proceedings, for example, are directed against property (independent of any criminal proceeding) alleged to have been used in criminal activity. In the American context, these procedures require only that the government shows probable cause that the property was implicated in criminal activity. On the other hand, criminal forfeiture proceedings require that the defendant go through the full process of a criminal trial and suffer a conviction. When the defendant suffers a conviction any property he has found to derive from the proceeds of a crime is seized from him and forfeited to the government. The second ground on which Peter Obi's Petition is hinged is that the Vice President-Elect, Senator Kashim Shettima filed a double nomination (Vice Presidential and senatorial). Assuming Shettima indulged in double nomination it cannot be a ground for an election petition. The electoral act did not say that any candidate that indulges in double nomination is liable to disqualification. It only prescribes a term of imprisonment if the person is found guilty. That means the person has to go through an investigation, prosecution, and conviction. This cannot be done through an election petition. The Presidential Election Petition Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear and determine this part of the Petition. Lastly, the Petitioner alleges that the Election held on 25 February 2023 was marred by corrupt practices and was not conducted in compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act,2022. An answer to this issue is provided in section 138 of the Electoral Act which provides that the Tribunal cannot nullify an election if it found that it was conducted in substantial compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act. I think the Petition is blustery and vexatious. I do not see Peter Obi winning this case based on the facts presented in his petition and the state of the Law. |
*Peter Obi's Petition At The Election Tribunal Is Bereft Of Statutory Allegations:* By: *Barrister Obol Okoi Obono-Obla* I have read a copy of the Petition filed on 21 March 2023 by the Presidential candidate of the Labour Party, Peter Obi before the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal, Abuja. In this write, I will only dwell on two issues raised in the Petition. They are the alleged No-qualifications of the APC presidential candidate, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, and the Vice President's running mate Senator Kashim Shettima. The petitioner (Peter Obi) alleged that the President-Elect is linked to drugs or narcotics. I will quickly submit that linkage to drugs is not one of the disqualification criteria spelled out in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,1999 (as amended). Before you can be barred from contesting you must have suffered a conviction that is related to dishonesty ten years before the election you want to contest. In the case under reference it is alleged that the case took place in 1993 which is 20 years ago. The election Asiwaju Bola Tinubu contested took place on 25 February 2023 more than 20 years after the event complained about. Section 137 (e) of the 1999 constitution is a perfect answer to ground one of the Petition. It provides as follows: He has been convicted and sentenced for an offense involving dishonesty or he has been found guilty of contravention of the Code of Conduct. Assuming the offense in which the President-Elect amounts to a criminal conviction, ten years have elapsed. If the conviction took place in 1993, this is almost 20 years. The Constitution contemplates the conviction to have taken place ten years from the date of the election in which the candidate participated. A forfeiture proceeding that doesn't end in the conviction of the defendant is not a conviction in the eye of the law. I do not think that a forfeiture proceeding is a criminal proceeding contemplated by the Constitution. A forfeiture proceeding is a non-conviction proceeding. There are two types of forfeiture proceedings. They are civil and criminal. Civil forfeiture proceedings, for example, are directed against property (independent of any criminal proceeding) alleged to have been used in criminal activity. In the American context, these procedures require only that the government shows probable cause that the property was implicated in criminal activity. On the other hand, criminal forfeiture proceedings require that the defendant go through the full process of a criminal trial and suffer a conviction. When the defendant suffers a conviction any property he has found to derive from the proceeds of a crime is seized from him and forfeited to the government. The second ground on which Peter Obi's Petition is hinged is that the Vice President-Elect, Senator Kashim Shettima filed a double nomination (Vice Presidential and senatorial). Assuming Shettima indulged in double nomination it cannot be a ground for an election petition. The electoral act did not say that any candidate that indulges in double nomination is liable to disqualification. It only prescribes a term of imprisonment if the person is found guilty. That means the person has to go through an investigation, prosecution, and conviction. This cannot be done through an election petition. The Presidential Election Petition Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear and determine this part of the Petition. Lastly, the Petitioner alleges that the Election held on 25 February 2023 was marred by corrupt practices and was not conducted in compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act,2022. An answer to this issue is provided in section 138 of the Electoral Act which provides that the Tribunal cannot nullify an election if it found that it was conducted in substantial compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act. I think the Petition is blustery and vexatious. I do not see Peter Obi winning this case based on the facts presented in his petition and the state of the Law. |
Freebills12:The certificate will be returned in 2031 |
Supremos:go and burst it in a court of law. Ruuuubbish |
Freebills12:https://www.nairaland.com/7197654/peter-obi-evil-how-peter |
Freebills12:so it is now another person's sin? But you accuse Tinubu of everything wrong in Nigeria! Shebi Tinubu is now a spirit that can be everywhere at the same time?. And your Mumu never do. Obi destroyed someone's hotel in Onitsha. Obi is a criminal |
OneTemplate:This is what we call "hit the ground running" not someone that will be looking for Oba to dethrone or making Igbos Oba in Lagos will be his priority |
nlreserve:Oga, you are in court. Stop making stupid comments |
Freebills12:Obi did this severally when he was governor of Anambra state. There was a guy he destroyed his hotel without warrant or even investigation by the police. What of those James nwafor (Obi's man Friday) killed and dumped their carcass in the River. It is not only when it affects Obi that you guys will shout. |
OfoIgbo:No! No!! No!!! When you accuse someone of criminality, you have to involve the Nigerian police cause it is the only institution recognised by the constitution to carry out criminal investigation. Any other thing is hearsay. It is the Nigerian police that will invite whoever not Obi. |
gammarays1:Ozuo! We dey wait your DEA from America, Mumu! The US DEA does not have jurisdiction in Nigeria, therefore cannot present any official document in court. Obi and his lawyers are Mumu! Election cases are civil cases. When you attach a criminal conspiracy to an election case, it is throw out because you cannot prove it beyond reasonable doubt and the tribunal is not created for such cases. Obi don lule pie PS The Nigerian police is the agency recognised by the constitution to prosecute all criminal cases. Therefore, if Obi and his foolish lawyer are to present any incriminating document against Tinubu, that document has to be investigated by the police Before it can be tendered in court. Take note, IT IS THE POLICE THAT PROSECUTE CRIMINAL CASES IN NIGERIA NOT INDIVIDUALS OR POLITICAL PARTIES |
SenatePresdo:The man no even know who you be. Next time call him His Excellency. |
SenatePresdo:Mumu, you never cry finish, you just dey start |
OfoIgbo:funny people. The onus of proof is on Obi not Tinubu. And you have to prove beyond reasonable doubt. |
SenatePresdo:yeah! The way the US government was supporting the Biafra movement. Ruuuubbish. Illinois court no, Illinois court ko. Nigeria is a sovereign state with rights. Get that into your skull |
KanwuliaExtra:small pikin no get sense . Okay now, go and present it to the tribunal na! For your information, presenting such an evidence in court would mean you are accusing the respondent of criminality. The FG and it's agencies are the only ones that can prosecute a criminal case in Nigeria. Obi cannot present any incriminating evidence in court without the Nigerian police vetting that document. It will be thrown out like a piece of tissue paper. |
SmartPolician:you just nailed it with Thor's hammer. FCT is a territory carved out from different state therefore you cannot allocate a 25% requirement on it as it would be a dublication. The thinking of the constitution is that you can use the FCT as a state if you lack the ⅔ requirement. It is in the reading of the statement that misinterpretation comes in. It should be read ⅔ in the 36 states (and the FCT) which means that the FCT is optional. The word and the FCT means the FCT is secondary, and not necessary but can aid in achieving the required result. PS Just like when Lagos state was the capital, then we had Ikeja as the seat of Lagos state government and Lagos Island as the seat of FG. Therefore can we then say one would have required 25% in Lagos as a state and another 25% in Lagos Island which was a federal Territory then? That would be absurd. |
emerged01: ![]() |
gammarays1:Mumu! Ode! For you to tender any report as a professional, you must be qualified as a practicing professional in Nigeria. You can't just come to Nigeria to depose to a case. Idiot. Even if you are the best in the world, you still have to be qualified by locals under the law. Goat. |
Rassco:Children everywhere! The DEA cannot give evidence in a Nigerian court, they are not qualified to do so. It is the Nigerian police that have that duty. The Nigerian police will write to the DEA requesting for information about the case. It is this information that is presented to the court by the Nigerian police. The police has already done that so this is a waste of time. |
helinues:the petition has failed before arrival. He was suppose to prove how he won in his petition. That was why they were given time to inspect the election materials so as to correlate their figures. He did nothing of such. His petition should have said he won the election in so..so states with so...so amount of votes. Then the case would have been to confirm if that was true, but now, Obi is chasing at shadows. Leaving the petition at the mercy of the court, not knowing that the court is not a father Xmas |
Yugoslavia247:keep deceiving yourself. In election cases, you front load the evidence. No new evidence is entertained once the trial begins. |
LIGHTROOM:the courts are not father Christmas. They will not give you what you don't ask for. You cannot introduce new prayers at the supreme court. |
Arafat2022:if this are your thoughts, then Atiku and Obi should not say pim. APC won both senate and House therefore they won the presidential election. |
sotall:Chai! Dis thing pain Una well well. Sorry o! |
Ndlistic:NA THEM |
Navalsadiq:Yeah, because you be JuJu. You dey everywhere and you dey see everything. Ruuuubbish. |
Oshkosch:stop displaying your ignorance in public. Results are declared inconclusive when an area (polling unit, ward, LG etc) is disenfranchised not when the void votes are higher than the difference between the two front runners. |
laiperi:Yeah, cigarette is legal in the UK but very expensive. The culprit is trying to avoid the duty on the cigarette. Actually, his actions may be due to ignorance like some of my brother's here who think because rice is cheaper in Benin Republic, we can just go there to buy. No, it's an offence. |
Henrymas:you guys have not been able to fight Agberos and thugs as you claim, and Una say Una wan lock down Nigeria on the 20th! Funny people |
So you really believe the Ruuuubbish that nobody voted for Tinubu! Dreamers! Keep dreaming! 220 million Nigerians indeed. |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 (of 125 pages)

