₦airaland Forum

They'll do anything possible to justify the judicial rascality on that Imo State case

garfield1:
Based on the presidential and guber results,nobody was in full control of orlu.the only lgas nwosu won massively was his nkwerre and rochas ideato south.im the remaining part of orlu,he struggled to win.votes were shared.the results now shows that hope was actually the one in control.dont forget he was senator repping orlu

You are always making senseless and baseless statements, how can you compare Presidential election with that of governorship election? Going by your logic it means that PDP swept the orlu zone during the governorship election because according to your logic PDP won 9 lgas out of 12 during the presidential election

garfield1:
Oga,do you have issues with comprehension? The case of otti and imo are different.otti petitioned based on overvoting and non compliance which needs polling unit proofs while hope case was purely based on excuses of results or non computation and the standard of proof is mainly documentary.why cant you differrntiate the both?
How many times will i tell you that the inec guidelines is inferior to the electoral act which prohibits cancellations at collation level

So, you know the law better than senior advocate of Nigeria?

Yesterday 24th?

shadeyinka:
This is Nigeria.
The next election is going to be WAR. Since politicians know that they can't win fairly in court nor expect INEC to be neutral, it will be a battle of who can kill ,steal or destroy most lives and properties

The whole system is in shambles, 2023 gonna be extraordinary interesting

shadeyinka:
The supreme court was already compromised. They just needed a reason to bend the election results in favour of APC.
Yes, I agree.
The worst the supreme court should have done is to order a re-run

Yes they perfected the plan before the case was even heard.
The rumors of Uzodinma taking over from Ihedioha came before the Case, Ihedioha tried his best to salvage the situation then, but met brick wall

OgundeleT:
If INEC failed to do that, why Didn't PDP present the one that was given to their party agents? They don't have it. Hope won that election, but, I don't know whether it was rigged.
Court accept the one APC presented because there was no contrary results.

it is not correct that Ihedioha did not cross Appeal. He did . The case was listed as no 9 for hearing on 13/1/2020 as SC/1470/2019, RT HON. Emeka Ihedioha vs Sen Hope Uzodinma& 3 ors.

Finally, it is not true that it is only at the polling center that results can be rejected. See the guidelines 2019 by the provisions of paragraph 28(c)(i)-(iv) which reads;

i) Review the figures against reports from the polling units;

ii) Request explanation(s) from the Presiding Officer(s) concerned, the circumstances of the inconsistency;

iii) Accept the results form if satisfied with the explanations; and

iv) If not satisfied locate the point of discrepancy, resolve the discrepancy and request the Presiding Officer to endorse.


Assertion from Ken AHIA, SAN.

[[s]quote author=Osidazz19 post=86074772]After reading through the reasons for the judgment, almost everybody (lawyers and laymen) will agree that if anything went wrong, it went wrong with INEC’s failure to proactively disprove the 388 polling unit results rendered by Governor Hope Uzodinma. In point of fact, INEC tendered nothing to contradict the results tendered by Uzodimma.

The second thing that went wrong was that Ihedioha’s lawyers simply alleged that the results were forged but they never tendered any evidence to prove their bare assertions. Pray, how can you accuse someone of a criminal offense (forgery) without proving it beyond reasonable doubt. They didn’t even present anything at all. Nothing!

Further, while Governor Uzodinma made credible assertions that elections were held in those 388 polling units just as they were also held in the rest of the remaining polling units across Imo State, neither INEC nor Ihedioha’s lawyers could contradict that or explain what happened to the votes scored in those 388 polling units.

In any system of elections, there is a presumption that elections held in all polling units. Therefore, anybody who asserts that they did not must the one proving such, not the other around. It is thus proper that this presumption, being unchallenged, had to be resolved in favor of Uzodinma.[b][/b][color=#006600][/color]


I don't know if IPOB retarded brainwashed monkeys can comprehend this simple analysis. May be I should spell it out for them in IGBO and hire an Igbo language expert to come and drill it into their empty skulls.[/quote][/s]

shadeyinka:
Something is still not right. INEC didn't supply any result which would have been an evidence for or against. Whose result then did the Supreme Court use?

That is the question they have refused to answer.
What Supreme Court should have done in the case like would have been order for a rerun

festacman:
Tanko could not have disbanded the panel on "3 occasions" if any of the parties involved did not genuinely request for it. In any case, what is special about Imo State or Emeka Ihedioha that Tanko would hell bent on removing him. Why Emeka and not Ikpeazu of Abia or Gov of Enugu?

Tanko was acting based on the orders given to him. Is there nobody who wasn't shocked on that abracadabra judgment?
Brother be truthful to yourself nobody will arrest you, the deal has been done

NGpatriot:
Is this the reason why INEC, the defendant, and his lawyers refused to produce credible evidence before the supreme court?

Lol Tanko knew that Uzodinma's case was dead on arrival and he had to disband the panel and did what they had instructed him to do.

Concerning the evidence... Ihedioha and INEC showed enough evidences to prove that those results are unreliable.

HOPE UZODINMA's Police Witness also contracted Hope Uzodinma's evidences and that ought to kill the case, but not with Tanko led Supreme Court who evidence have shown that they have script to pull the Democracy down!

festacman:
I sympathize with Emeka Ihedioha. Losing a life-changing court case is never a pleasant experience but an unanimous judgement by seven Justices of the Supreme Court should have doused emotional outbursts and insults that were were hurled at the Temple of Justice. Unfortunately it did not. The integrity, qualifications, intellect and mental health of the judges were questioned by members and supporters of opposition. Even some senior lawyers threw caution to the wind and made dangerous insinuations without waiting for the details of the ruling. SMH

When Tanko disbanded the panel of Imo State case on 3 occasions what does that tell you

SUPREME COURT DECISION IN:
SENATOR HOPE UZODINMA VS RT. HON. EMEKA IHEDIOHA

SALIENT AREAS OF EVIDENCE OF PW54

(POLICE OFFICER IN THE TRIBUNAL)

By
Coalition in Defence of Nigerian Democracy and Constitution (CDNDC)
Convener, Ariyo-Dare Atoye
aristotle001us@yahoo.com

The Supreme Court based its judgment in the above case, solely on the evidence of PW54 DCP Rabiu Hussain.

From the C.TC. of the proceedings of the Tribunal on 31July, 2019 DCP RABIU HUSSAIN testified in the Tribunal as follows:
“In Exhibit NNN1 to NNN18, (subpoena) I was asked to produce 388 Forms EC8As retrieved by the Police Officers. I have some of the FORMS. I don’t have 388 FORMS. The total number I brought is 368 and I cannot lay my hands on 20 FORMS”.
OUR COMMENT:

The record of Court only showed that 366 FORMS EC8As (not 368 and definitely not 388) were admitted in evidence and marked as Exhibits PPP1 to PPP366. These conflicting figures of 366, 368, or 388 Forms make his evidence completely unreliable.
DCP RABIU HUSSAINI CONTINUED:
“I didn’t tabulate the scores in Exhibit PPP1 to PPP166(366?).

I didn’t observe the entries in any of them.
I didn’t go through Exhibits PPP1 to PPP166(366) because Police are not interested in the scores of the parties”.
“I am surprised that the number of forms I tendered are not up to the number I told the Hon. Tribunal”.
“I cannot know whether there are mutilations or tampering in Exhibit PPP1 to PPP366.”
OUR ANALYSIS

The above evidence of PW54, the Deputy Commissioner of Police, did not say what each candidate scored or the figures.

PW54 did not give evidence with regards to 388 polling units. PW54 did not tender results from 388 polling units.

PW54 stated in his testimony that he did not know the contents of Exhibits PPP1 to PPP366, or PPP1 to PPP388 or any of the forms whatever the number.

PW54 did not testify that results from 366, or 368 or 388 polling units were excluded.

QUESTION?

If, from the Certified True Copy of the evidence/testimony of PW54 which the Supreme Court relied upon to give its final judgment, there is no evidence of the votes scored in Exhibits PPP1 to PPP366, or PPP1 to 368 or 388 where did the Supreme Court get the 213,695 votes it added to the scores of Hope Uzodinma?. And from where did the Supreme Court get the evidence that results from 388 polling units were excluded when PW54 testified that he brought only 366 or 368 FORMS EC8As. Since 366 and not 388 FORMS were eventually found to be tendered by DCP Rabiu Hussaini, where did the Supreme Court get the 213,695 votes it added to Hope Uzodinma?. Or did Supreme Court merely copy tge pleadings of Hope Uzodinma and regarded it as evidence? It is trite Law that averment in pleadings or Address of Counsel cannot take the place of evidence?

From the 20 or 22 EC8As forms PW54 admitted that he omitted to tender at the Tribunal from the 388 he was subpoenered to produce, how many votes did it contain for each candidate? What is the spread? These are questions the Supreme Court must answer, since their judgment did not cover these issues and contain unbelievable gaps.

It is obvious that the Supreme Court relied only on the submission of Hope Uzodinma without any reference to the records of proceedings of the Tribunal/Court of Appeal or otherwise, it would have realised that even though Hope Uzodinma claimed 388 polling units, he only dumped 366 discredited polling units results through the Police, yet the Supreme Court unilaterally credited him with figures from the 388 units which figures did not remove the 20 or even 22 polling units that were in fact not tendered before the tribunal .

The Supreme Court judgement was erroneously premised on 388 polling units results when indeed only 366 polling units’ results were admitted in the Tribunal before being expunged on very solid grounds by both the Tribunal and the Court of Appeal. We may never know the impact the exclusion of the results from the 20 or 22 units by the Supreme Court based on its own perverse findings could have had on the scores of each candidate.

Our Submission

It is our candid submission that the Supreme Court is left with no other option than to review and reverse this anomaly, even if it means applying a Judicial Doctrine of Necessity (borrowing from the intervention of the National Assembly, when Nigeria was in a big fix). The confidence of Nigerians in the Judiciary is at the lowest and we believe that the Supreme Court can help to restore it and save the future of the future of elections. This is the time to apply what the Supreme Court in Federal Republic of Nigeria V. MKO Abiola (1995) 7 NWLR, said:

“Justice must be rooted in confidence and confidence is destroyed when right-minded people go away thinking: The Judge is biased.”

By
Coalition in Defence of Nigerian Democracy and Constitution (CDNDC)
Convener, Ariyo-Dare Atoye
aristotle001us@yahoo.com

ObaIgwe1:
Bro read the judgement.

According to this SC judgement, INEC did not prove their case at all, not to even talk of proving beyond reasonable doubts.

INEC called no witness.

INEC did not claim or prove that their were no elections at those polling units or that there were violent or that the original results were damaged.

INEC just claimed the results were not genuine but they didn't tender the genuine results...

If there is any miscarried of justice in this case, blame INEC and Ihedioha's lawyers.

Read the account of Alex Otti's lawyer Ken Ahia SAN ,


I was not going to respond on this matter no matter how goaded cos, because I was involved. The judgment and that of Abia did not come to me as a surprise but rather as a rude disappointment in our hallowed judiciary. However , in other to educate others like Mike, I wish to disagree with you on legal points.

First , in the case of Abia which was based on documentary evidence collected from INEC, public documents paid for and obtained from INEC,a party to the petition, the Scrt held that we should have called polling unit by polling units witnesses to prove the allegation, in Imo results DISPUTED by INEC tendered by a single policeman was accepted and relied on. Hope did not call witnesses from all those polling units. The POS did not testify.

Secondly, it is not correct that Ihedioha did not cross Appeal. He did . The case was listed as no 9 for hearing on 13/1/2020 as SC/1470/2019, RT HON. Emeka Ihedioha vs Sen Hope Uzodinma& 3 ors.

Finally, it is not true that it is only at the polling center that results can be rejected. See the guidelines 2019 by the provisions of paragraph 28(c)(i)-(iv) which reads;

i) Review the figures against reports from the polling units;

ii) Request explanation(s) from the Presiding Officer(s) concerned, the circumstances of the inconsistency;

iii) Accept the results form if satisfied with the explanations; and

iv) If not satisfied locate the point of discrepancy, resolve the discrepancy and request the Presiding Officer to endorse.

Just for our information. So if the SC will not accept results from INEC duly certified as authentic in Abia appeal on the ground that the witnesses were not called, but proceeded to accept result tendered by one policeman , not certified, also denounced by INEC, then the thing smelling is not fish.

nzube89:
oga the cancellation was done in uzodimma stronghold that oru east and or west

Lol you meant the over 200,000 votes were from Oru east and west?

Blindersoff:
If Uche Nwosu and Okorocha were in full control of Orlu zone, where did the 388 PUs come from?



Spin another tale let me hear

You and I know that those polling units are ghost units, how could Uzodinma have defeated nwosu in his strog hold like Orlu, Nkwere, Isu, Nwangele, Njaba and Orsu?
Okorocha was in full control of his Ideato south and north, Irona was in full charge of his Oguta and Ohaji.
Uzodinma was only in control of his Oru east and west

Blindersoff:
Tell that to 388 polling units

OK sir, but you know I'm telling you the truth.
Okorocha and nwosu were in full control of orlu zone during that election, Uzodinma was like orphan in orlu zone then

Blindersoff:
The cancelled results were FROM ORLU which happened to be Uzodinmas strongholds.

The judgement stated clearly that the appellant (UZODINMA) scored overwhelmingly above the others in the cancelled PUs and this means even if the others got votes it would read something like

APC 548
PDP 4

APC 729
PDP 13

Surely you cannot expect an Mbaise man to drag votes with an Orlu man in Orlu?

The other parties were mostly insignificant because the votes were mainly between APC and PDP

Uche nwosu was way popular and accepted in orlu zone than Uzodinma, plus Okorocha's incumbency, there's no way Uzodinma could have won any other lga outside his oru east and west in orlu zone

Only fools will believe that Uzodinma garnered up to 100,000 votes during the governorship election that had Emeka Ihedioha, uche nwosu, Ararume and Ohakim.. Someone that never campaigned, it's disgusting to that Uzodinma is reaping where he didn't sow

Commendable

Before some Ignoramus will start spewing trash, for the record he won his seat under apga and defected to PDP

garfield1:
The supreme course never said so.it seems you dont pay attention to details.it said overvoting is if votes exceed total registered votes or ticked accreditations in the manual register not card readers

Why was Dino election annulled?

INEC ruled that election did not hold there, how come Supreme Court agreed with Uzodinma that elections were held when the umpire that conduct election said no, elections weren't held

Supreme Court Judgement on Imo State is an attempt to create anarchy or Coup from Judiciary.

It is an attempt to take over elected Govt through illegal means hiding under the altar of the Court !

garfield1:
They did not err.uzodinma case is on incorrect computation not non compliance and most politicians petition based on non compliance and not wrong computation which is easier to prove

Supreme Court had ruled that once the number of votes exceeded the number of accredited voters it was over voting... So what happened to this case that the number of votes were in over 100,000 above the accredited voters

garfield1:
Just like the lower courts,you misunderstand the issues.except the part where atiku accused buhari of forgery,atiku case is based on electoral malpractices and non compliance which means he needs to call witnesses from all polling units.if you claim polling unit results are fake or elections were rigged or there was no election as adduced by atiku,you have an impossible task to prove it.

Uzodinma did not say this.he simply said elections were held and it was free and fair but that his results were not computed.all he needs to do is to provide the duplicate copies while the police provides theirs which was done.eyesitnesses are not necessary.

OK, let's assume that Supreme Court was right to admit the results even though (they have no rights of collation of results and shouldn't have admitted those results), what did supreme court do when they found out that they number of accredited voters were higher than that of the total votes with excess over 102,000 ? what did they do when they found that only 1 candidate had all the votes in all 388 polling units where over 70 candidates contested in the same election?
What did the supreme Court do when the know that each polling units has the maximum number of 500 votes and do not exceed 500, but according to the supreme Court calculation 500*388=213,000

danie09:
If i was ihedioha i deal with my legal team physically, spiritually and all means available.
Cos they were forking complicit.
They all knew where this case was heading from the tribunal.
And was INEC complicit too?
Probably yes.
All uzodinma needed do to win was to buy off ihedioha's lawyers and the INEC legal team.

Theres no point blaming the supreme court.
The court and the judges did nothing but their job.

Supreme Court erred going by their previous rulings, ask yourself why Tanko disbanded the panel handling the Imo case 3 times

garfield1:
That is not the businesz of the courg

But during the presidential petition the Supreme Court made it their business by telling Atiku to provide eye witnesses of every polling units in all the 11 states he claimed to have won, while that of Uzodinma only 28 eye witnesses were called out of the 388 polling units

excomarow:
That name sound like Mexican.....
I thought Alakija is the Richest Woman in Africa...

The name is Portuguese, and there is nothing like Mexican name

JosephXavier:
If you are sure that that is the case,

Let the protest continue although nothing will come out of it but at least, let their voice be heard

Exactly
Protest tells the world you didn't accept stupidity and injustice whether verdict was final or not from a supreme Court that has been supremely compromised!
Protest registers your voice of righteous dissent for posterity's sake!

JosephXavier:
I was supporting the demonstration until I heard that about a number of IMO state law makers have decamped from PDP to APC and I decided to rest my case
They are all traitors they deserve worse than that

Those PDP lawmakers who defected today were of AA and apga, they defected to PDP when PDP came to power.
Let's be guided please

Kudos to those that have participated in the protest of the sham the called judgment.
Protest tells the world you didn't accept stupidity and injustice whether verdict was final or not from a supreme Court that has been supremely compromised!
Protest registers your voice of righteous dissent for posterity's sake!

Ok