₦airaland Forum

Naija na BIG JOKE!!!

As a ardent supporter of APC, I am obliged to agree with Senator Abiribe. The level of insecurity in the country is dehumanizing and it seems the government has no solution whatsoever. In civilized climes he should have resigned. How do they even sleep with these happenings when they know its their failings?
If you can't stand the heat you simply leave the kitchen

[quote author=Racoon post=86205943][/quote]Yes & not Starboy Osinbanjo

U don't win elections like this. Obaseki seems to be a political neophyte.
Good luck to him on his voyage..

Jestin:
Political prostitutes.....greedy retards.This is why I said in one of comment few days ago that Igbo is not ready to be president yet because they can betray each other for monetary gains.

I disagree totally. Few days ago Kano PDP Chairman decamped immediately Supreme Court affirmed Ganduje winner. Its not about Igbo's. Its in our(Nigerians) DNA

There was a time Nigeria was ranked 2nd after Bandaglash. Its swinging......

Good development

I sorry for my country

Osagyefo98:
That's good of you leah shearibu.

Congratulations on your new born baby.

Seems you really enjoying there.

You seem so uncouth!
Can u imagine....

BuhariAdvocate:
see how a former governor reason .you don't even know the law of your country.

That's the quality of leadership in Nigeria.
To be the President: SSCE
To be the Governor: SSCE
To be LG Chairman: FSLC

To be an NPower Beneficiary(N30,000): B.Sc

Eteka1:
The issues raised are mostly that of primaries and candidacy. These are pre-election matters.
It won't fly.

Those issues were even mentioned in the judgement. See below.

I don't understand the kind of lawyers or adviser these politician has. Even a layman should know this will not fly. It will be thrown out once and cost award against him

Locking the barn when the Horse has already bolted!

Deepthoughts:
you are just dancing round the point I raised while avoiding it completely,the results showed overwhelming victory for uzodima but also proved overwhelming over voting so how do you marry the two?,why can't the new tally be made public by the supreme Court since inec refused because they said it was the supreme Court that did the tally n declarations?

There can't be over voting because of the following facts;
The results from the 388 polling units were totally excluded. That means both the accredited votes and valid votes weren't taken into consideration by INEC when they made their declaration.
Naturally since the supreme court added those valid votes from the 388 polling units automatically accredited votes will increase with at least the combination of valid votes scored by all the candidates, void votes, cancelled votes etc
There cannot be valid votes without accreditation

Deepthoughts:
So even as those results clearly showed over voting,you don't think the supreme Court should have cancelled the results as a whole instead of declaring uzodima,is it right then that a fraudulent evidence should be tendered to support one's case n for the court to accept such?.

The evidence presented before the supreme court was that elections took place in those polling units and Uzodinma overwhelming won. PDP and INEC couldn't disprove that. There was no way the Supreme Court would be calling for another election when the facts before her shows that there is a clear winner. The supreme court justices are not magicians. They decide cases on the strength of the evidence presented

Any sane mind will know 7 supreme court Justices can never be compromised at the same time. Agreed those results might have been forged but the onus of proof lies on the respondents. Like its said; He who allege must prove. The supreme court only worked with facts presented before her. Supreme court judges don't dwell on sentiments and emotions.

Doubleoh7:
I like the fact that you admitted that the solution from beginning ought to have being a rerun. So why then didnt the supreme court order for a rerun in those areas instead of admitting and collating the figures thereby making total number of votes in an election higher than the total number of accredited voters?

Because HOPE was able to prove that elections took place in those polling units. We should stop blaming the supreme court. The blame lies squarely on INEC. Their level of incompetence in IMO election was next to none. Even declaring Ihedioha winner in the first place was without meeting the 25% in 2/3 local government areas was evident

tomdon:
Those votes were cancelled.
Supreme Court now run election while the budget goes to inec
A re run is the sensible thing any judge or panel should've recommended. They are compromised and the ruling will be upturned inshallah

FYI those votes where never cancelled. INEC acted like the election in those polling units never happened. That might be true. But HOPE came with results INEC never had

One might not agree with the judgement of the supreme court which is quite understandable but when
I read a lot of comments about valid votes more than accredited votes and I then wonder if we really think at all. Most of us just ignorantly follow the bandwagon or we already know but simply chose to sound foolish.
Alright INEC simply didn't did not take into cognisance both the accredited votes and valid votes of those 388 polling units. With those units results now added by the supreme court both the accredited votes and valid vote will automatically increase. What is difficult there to understand?
The fact that persons I thought were intelligent say these crap of valid votes more than accredited votes baffles me.
Na wa oooo

Jagaban has spoken. The wise measures his words appropriately before uttering

ZombieHUNT:
Peter obi was second and had ojukwu support

Its Simple na. The elections for both HOA and Governorship was conducted the same date, Ojukwu supported APGA cos he floated that party, Peter Obi was rigged out likewise other APGA House of Assembly candidates. Most likely all of them headed for the tribunal Peter Obi was able to prove his case and the Other APGA House of Assembly candidates couldn't. There is no way anyone can twist it. The case of IMO in my personal opinion is never the fault of the court rather it was as a result of the Failures of our Electoral System. More of half of those who occupy elective positions in our country didn't actually win their elections in good sense. They saw the weaknesses in the electoral system and exploited it. I believed HOPE looked at the Electoral Act long before the elections and had his part to" VICTORY" all planned out.

ZombieHUNT:
You certainly can't compare both scenarios.. The Ojukwu effect did the deed.... But here in Imo.. It was day time robbery

bro its same thing; Peter Obi won through the court without APGA having any House of Assembly Member

omowolewa:
Malami should just encourage the parties concerned to go to court.

Malami should be clear in his statementd, people would misconstrue his advise as judgement which only a court can order given his position.

There is already a case law(judicial precedent) to that effect from the supreme court. If the Governors can't abide by this then the FG should start dissolving the State Government and appointing caretaker committees. Like they say, what is good for the goose is also good for the g.........

tesppidd:
For Bauchi -
This is the beauty of democracy. It shows that the Supreme Court judges have refused to be intimidated by Buhari. Kudos to the Judiciary for resisting intimidation by the Presidency.
This is the rule of law in action.


For Plateau -
Buhari has killed democracy in Nigeria. Tanko is the worst CJN Nigeria has ever produced. Democracy is dead in Nigeria. The Supreme court under Tanko must reverse itself. PDP won that election in Plateau.
APC has destroyed the Supreme Court.


Thoughts of a wailer;
same day, same hour, same minute, same second.

Hahahahaha!!!! True talk fellow

BrownRoofRep:
If you know you know

These were pictures from settlements after protest against Amnesty Int'l. Not today's pictures definitely

DEMOCRACY NOT IN DANGER!!!

Enemyofpeace:
what word?

curse not course

helinues:
It is illegal to walk late in the night in Nigeria entirely, not only in Lagos, that's according to Nigeria security officers..

May be you never encountered dreaded local vigilante..

That's f..cking wrong! The Wandering Act has long been repealed over 30 years ago

sholatem:
Tenement rate suppose to be paid by occupant of d apartment while land use charge is to be paid by landlord

who told u that? Better be careful oooo

Nuttybynature:
Both the analyst and the OP, your head is not correct

Who's this demented fool?
Can u read at all?

Samuel Meyiwa Khalil
THE IMO GUBERNATORIAL JUDGMENT - A PAINFUL BUT LEGALLY CORRECT VERDICT!

It is indeed a perplexing paradox: Hope Uzodinma may not have won the 2019 Imo State gubernatorial election, yet the Supreme Court, on the facts, was right in declaring him the winner of that election in law. The error was not the Supreme Court's, but that of Governor Emeka Ihedioha's legal team; and it was a crucially fatal error.

What happened was this: during the governorship election in Imo State, apparently concocted results, perhaps not having any basis whatsoever in reality, BUT SIGNED BY INEC PRESIDING OFFICERS, were turned in from more than 350 polling units, giving Hope Uzodinma of the APC an incredibly unassailable lead. When those results were transmitted to the wards collation centres, the collation officers, who had no power in law to cancel or reject them, rejected the said polling units results, and refused to collate them, thereby effectively excluding them from the total tally of the governorship result that was eventually declared by the Returning Officer. In the aftermath of the said exclusion, the Independent National Electoral Commission declared Governor Ihedioha the winner of the election.

The exclusion of the results of those polling units was the fulcrum of the petition presented at the Tribunal by Hope Uzodinma. Ever since David Mark V. ABUBAKAR USMAN, and DOMA V. INEC, the law has been settled that neither collation officers nor a returning officer, has the power in law to exclude a polling unit result duly signed by the presiding officer at the polling unit; only the election tribunal possesses the power to cancel or exclude such a result. So, at the point of its presentation, Senator Uzodinma's petition was potentially viable, in spite of the apparent dubiousness of the polling units results on which it was anchored, there being a REBUTTABLE presumption of regularity and correctness, by virtue of both the Electoral Act and Evidence Act, enuring in favour of any result declared by a presiding officer.

The backbreaking and fatal error made by Ihedioha's legal team was in not filing a CROSS PETITION fiercely challenging the integrity of the suspect polling units results upon which Uzodinma was relying, and praying the election tribunal to formally nullify the said results. Without a cross petition, none of the grounds under section 138 (1) of the Electoral Act for questioning the elections conducted in those polling units in which Uzodinma "won" could have been competently raised by Governor Ihedioha in his defence to Uzodinma's petition. This was the ratio decidendi of the old Court of Appeal decision in IDRIS V. A.N.P.P.(2008)8 NWLR(PT.1088) Page 1. In the recent Court of Appeal decision in ATIKU ABUBAKAR V. BUHARI, the Court of Appeal again invoked the principle in dismissing Buhari's contention that Atiku ABUBAKAR was born in Cameroun to parents who originally were Camerounians, and thus disqualified from contesting the election. Dismissing the contention, the Court of Appeal held that the issue was incompetent, since Buhari did not file a cross petition.

Ihedioha indeed did set up facts in his Reply to the petition rehashing the serial infractions that led to the exclusion of the results of the said 300 plus polling units. But that was legally not enough, in the absence of a cross petition. Besides, such renditions by a Respondent in a mere Reply or Statement of Defence are clearly incompetent. The reason for the incompetence was was made clear by the Court of Appeal in NATIONAL JUDICIAL COUNCIL & ORS V. HON. JUSTICE JUBRIL BABAJIDE ALADEJANA & ORS(2014) LPELR - 2413 (CA) Page 31, paras C - F, at ratio 3 thus -

"The law is that it is a plaintiff who by his statement of claim primarily nominates issues to be tried in a suit and which he relies on to have the judgment of the Court. For a defendant, it is only necessary to resist the plaintiff's claim on the facts pleaded. It is not for a defendant to set up facts which would convey that it is not just setting up a defence but setting up a new case of his own. He can only do so by way of a counter claim..."

Shorn of the legalese, what the above authority is simply saying is that since the issue nominated for trial by Hope Uzodinma was the unlawfulfulness or otherwise of the exclusion of the results of the 300 plus polling units by the ward collation officers, Ihedioha's defence was therefore necessarily restricted by law to showing that those who excluded the results had the power in law to exclude them. Without a cross petition praying for the nullification of those results, the law forbade Governor Ihedioha as respondent from raising the issue of the alleged serial corrupt practices and irregularities marring the said results, in a mere statement of defence; that was a new issue not nominated by Uzodinma as petitioner. Ihedioha, being a Respondent, could only have competently raised them via a cross petition, being a new issue not nominated by Uzodinma, the petitioner.

Tragically, Ihedioha's legal team forgot to include the pivotal cross petition. And in the absence of a cross petition, the Supreme Court was right in law, painfully though it may seem, to rely on the presumption of regularity and correctness enshrined by both the Electoral Act and Evidence Act in favour of the said results, and to reckon with them and add them up to the final result, since Ihedioha's legal team had woefully failed to effectively attack the results and rebut that presumption. For the Supreme Court, this was the legally correct conclusion to come to, having found that INEC had no power in law to exclude polling units results duly affirmed by the various polling units presiding officers!

Kenneth Ikonne

Charleys:
Because he is going to infect the whole state.

Lastly my infection talk was for information purpose only.

Who cares?

nameo:
The Supreme court has the power to add back cancelled votes if they hold that it was cancelled illegally?

But these vites were not cancelled by INEC. If not INEC would not have declared the election conclusive on the 1st place. I am reading now that the SC says that they were not collated!!!

So who deliberately did not collate such a huge number for a single candidate?

INEC? I hardly doubt that cos we are talking about INEC against the ruling party here!

So again, who did?

I honestly think those votes where rejected by INEC due to say wide irregularities complained of by other parties.
How would votes not be collated? Was it that the inec returning officers failed to submit the results or what? Well like I said by tomorrow morning in Channel TV sunrise daily program this is gonna be a hot topic. Its definitely going to be expository