₦airaland Forum

Lotanna2:
The court will shoot down the fct matter,deep inside you you know this.asduming there's a rerun between tinubu and obi,it will be a massacre.
The gender on his nysc is not female.failure to call nysc killed it.failure to call southwest college or CSU to verify the gender also killed it.besides,wole submitted his admission letter which shows male.
Forfeiture is not a ground for disq.the court will only concern themselves with conviction or not...even if it was a punishment,atiku start witness agreed that it wasn't registered here.we haven't even talked about whether it applies to Nigeria.
Worst case scenario is rerun in 18000 units where tinubu will still win.there is nothing in this case,take your mind elsewhere.the buhari case of 2019 was more difficult

How come you sound so sure of what the judges will decide? Do you have the judgment already?

About 25% in FCT, I’ve not mentioned that there’s a Supreme Court precedent on it. It was set in 2008 in a case between Yaradua and Buhari where the Supreme Court ruled that it is not mandatory to win the FCT before you are declared winner of the election; however, it’s is mandatory to get 25% in the FCT.

The made the above ruling because Buhari was challenging the election based on the fact that Yaradua did not win in Abuja but INEC declared him.

What do you say about that?

fergie001:
1. Tinubu currying Kwankwaso and others is strategic. He has started campaign for 2027, that's how our politicians roll. They think of how to remain there, that's what's in their brains... All of them, bar none.

Come to think of it, we knew there was a glitch, we knew it was human error and deliberate to favour the incumbent President's Party, but if you opt for a run-off, which State and which will it not take place?

The only option is to cancel the General Election in totality which 99.99999% CANNOT HAPPEN. Who will bring money for another election? So what's the alternative? The evidence will now go to States.... How will the petitioners prove that a State like Rivers will substantially affect the whole election. That's hard to believe.

At the tribunal in 2007, the only dissent was from Justice Sylvanus Nsofor (of blessed memory) who ruled that the whole election be cancelled. Infact, in his written judgement, he wrote: "May Nigeria never witness a day like April 21, 2007"

Whilst the leading judgement opted for cancellation in Imo and Edo or Ogun (can't remember).

The only realistic options before us today is

i. a total cancellation of the election and/or
ii. a disqualification of Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

(So which is more likelier from the evidence adduced so far).

That Tinubu did not win the majority of votes will be very difficult to prove because how can you produce BVAS machines or CTCs of PUs where the alleged fraud took place, how many? This is not a Governorship Election... It is over 176k+ PUs (So it's a win and others go to Court situation)

If you say the integrity of the Judiciary have not been questioned before as of now, then you didn't follow that of 2007. No election can be worse than that, making a sitting President, the major beneficiary, to openly admit it. The SC even decided 4-3, you and I know this heavily padded SC will not do that irrespective the apparent irregularities.

(The only difference is the social media presence and the focus from the youths).

2. Tinubu going to the SS is also a strategic one because he wants to break the stranglehold of the opposition (this is what he does best).
He was really surprised at their performance for him in this election. The SS delivered for him and they are the new bride. Except Bayelsa, they produced Senators in all the States...
Edo - 2, AKS - 1, CRS - 2, Delta - 2, Rivers - (potential 3).

He knows that politically speaking, the SE will be in seeming opposition to him, that's a fact. So he needs to break those ranks at all costs!

Again, the focus for Obi and Atiku have now shifted to the qualifications of Bola Tinubu with regards to his been female, forfeiture and whether indeed he graduated from CSU or NYSC exemption etc.

The Judges will work on the facts and again, realistically knowing fully well that we are talking about a sitting President here.... At least 2 of those Judges will likely be heading to the SC in the next batch (We know them already) via the signature of the man who is sitting there, so he is already 1-up.

Now to the Qualifications issue:

1. The issue of Shettima's double nomination has been settled at the Supreme Court.

2. The issue of 25% of FCT will be shut down. I find it a bit absurd for one State to hold the Country hostage in an election, I will prefer them to use God's own State rather than the Centre of Unity. The mischief rule will definitely be introduced.

Come to think of it, if Tinubu doesn't get 25% what happens... A re-run in FCT alone? or the person who got 25% should be made President? or how will it be done? So if there is a re-run and he continues to get less than 25% what happens?

3. Over-voting or non-accreditation in PUs will be difficult to prove because following the SC decisions in Oyetola v Adeleke, you need the BVAS machines or CTC reports that will comfortably show substantial non-compliance.

Again, there has to be enough PU results tendered, just enough to tilt the balance or show that indeed if the votes were added the petitioner(s) indeed stood a real chance. Across 176k+ PUs, that is a tall order.

4. On the issue of $460,000 forfeiture.... In criminal cases everything must add up. One of the cardinal principles of criminal suits is that it is better to set an accused free than to sentence an innocent.

I don't want to delve too much in that, but was Tinubu CONVICTED in 1993? (That's the only answer the PEPT will want to know).

5. On the issue of alleged forgery of his documents.....

The SC was emphatic in Oyetola v Adeleke, Dantiye v APC, Dankwambo v Abubakar, Agi v PDP, APC v Elebeke, Abubakar v INEC, Maihaja v Geidam, APC v Obaseki, Mohammed v Wamakko

The basic proof that any document in question is forged is a DISCLAIMER from the awarding Institution. Without any disclaimer from these Institutions affirming there was some form of forgery, makes it a basket case of speculations.

I will leave you to know the probable direction this case will head to.

What I’ve discovered is that most of your arguments on this PEPT case is centred around political expediency rather than legality and constitutionality.

First, on the FCT argument, Tinubu’s witness came to court with a document from a Committee that was setup solely for the place of the FCT in the Nigerian State. From the document, it was stated that the Committee recommended that Abuja be given a Special Status in the constitution since it’s our center of unity. Does that not prove that that constitutional provision “AND The FCT” was a deliberate provision by the framers of the constitution relying on the recommendations of the committee on FCT? If yes, why should someone who didn’t fulfill that provision be declared winner?

See, after finding out that there was actually a committee that recommended that Abuja be given a Special Status, I now realized why Atiku and Obi made it one of the focal point of their petitions.

Based on that FCT provision alone, a runoff election could be ordered by the courts. Because while Tinubu got simple majority, he failed to fulfill the spread having failed to get 25% in the FCT.

Now, in case a runoff election is ordered, who would square with Tinubu? The constitution says it’s the person that won the most state (not the person that came second). Now, considering that they all tied at 12 states each at the end of the election, what Obi needs to do is to prove that truly he won Rivers; that shoots him up to 13 states. If he’s able to recover Benue, Akwa Ibom and Taraba like he’s also contesting, that shoots him up to 16 states.

So, the runoff would now be between Tinubu and Obi. That’s supposing that after recovering 4 states, Obi is still not able to offset Tinubu’s lead, and also supposing that Tinubu is not disqualified.

Now, what did the constitution say about a runoff election? The constitution said the winner would then be determined by simple majority. No question of spread this time around. Which is why I was surprised you asked if they would keep repeating the election if the winner continues to fail to get 25% in Abuja.

Now, Can Tinubu be disqualified based on the evidence in court?

Now, I wouldn’t say I have an answer to the above question. But do you recall Tinubu lawyers’ argument about Tinubu’s $460,000 forfeiture during Pre-hearing? They said it was Tinubu’s bank account that was sued and not Tinubu. But yesterday, their witness, a lawyer in America, admitted in court that it was indeed Tinubu that forfeited the money but then argued that it was a “civil forfeiture”. But do you remember Justice Ariwoola’s definition of forfeiture?

Again, about his certificates, PDP is not questioning the authenticity of Tinubu’s certificates. PDP is not saying that Tinubu didn’t go to CSU. If PDP was questioning the authenticity of Tinubu’s certificates, that’s the only time you would have suggested that CSU should have been called to disprove the documents as inauthentic.

But PDP submitted Certified True Copies (public document) from CSU that showed that the Tinubu that attended their institution was female. The implication is that whilst the certificates Tinubu is parading are authentic, they belong to a woman.

Now, this is antithetical to the Tinubu who registered with APC as male. Their honorable justices know that the Bola Tinubu that was sworn in as Nigeria’s president is a man. How do you reconcile that?

Lastly, Tinubu submitted an exemption certificates dated 1983 but NYSC started giving exemption certificates in 1985. But I don’t even think that’s what PDP is contesting if not, they would have callled an NYSC official to testify that truly the Service started giving exemptions in 1985, not 1985. I think PDP is contesting that the gender on Tinubu’s NYSC certificate which was submitted to INEC, is female. Now, do you need NYSC to come testify that truly what is written on a certificate is female?

Do you honestly think that the courts will exonerate all these?

tabaralph:
I know this is the joker apc will use to nail obi, obi case will be dismissed latest end of this month, you can’t build anything on nothing, a non registered member can’t contest for a political office of the party you didn’t register on time for

What law supports this claim of yours?

fergie001:
I believe Obi's prayers are:-

1. Tinubu is not qualified to contest the Office of the President.

2. He did not score 25% in FCT

3. There were manipulations in certain PUs/States.

4. Tinubu's $460000 forfeiture

5. Shettima's double nomination

---

I believe the petitioners will want one of these:

-Tinubu be disqualified
-A re-run (I don't know between who and who)
One of Atiku/Obi be declared winner.

---

Following this case and with the weight of evidence, which do you think the Judges will grant!?

Any?
Tbh, none to me.

Hmmmm!

See, I feel the judiciary is boxed to a corner.

Their integrity has never been more questioned like it’s being questioned now and I feel they must have some compulsion to salvage what is left of their image.

Everyone knows that Obi won the election. Or for some of you who think otherwise, at least you would agree that a lot malpractices took place.

The only reason it’s in contention whether anything will come out of the courts is just because of legal procedures and technicalities. Apart from that, it shouldn’t even be debated whether the courts will declare Obi winner.

Again, don’t forget the EU report which cast the election in bad light. The judiciary is further boxed into not upholding the election or risk inflicting an irreparable damage to its image.

Considering all these therefore, with the facts laid in court so far, I see a rerun, not runoff, where all participants would still participate.

I feel like Tinubu is already envisaging this and that’s why he has been extending hand of friendship to people like Kwankwaso, and packing appointments to Southsouth to try to get the people of the region to his side.

But I won’t be surprised if Tinubu is disqualified.

Just like I still won’t be surprised if the election is upheld (highly unlikely but this is Nigeria).

Emperormartin:
It's like a football match when obidients are winning 2-0 then bamidele enters as a super sub and then scored an own goal.

But the final outcome of the match lies with the center referee who are the judges.

Exactly!

The final outcome lies with the center referee. The only good news is that we are all seeing the scoreboard.

If the referee announces anything different from what we have all seen, then the ojoro would be open for the world to see.

Emperormartin:
Please if you don't know how to lie just stay put...

Yes, Tinubu want people to come and defend his mandate but don't make a mess of yourself and your principal Tinubu.

Tinubu himself won't find this funny

Lol!

Just like the INEC witness of yesterday, Sen. Bamidele ended up causing an almost irreparable damage to Tinubu’s case.

Imagine he admitted that Tinubu actually forfeited money due to drug offenses.

Hard times for Agbado munching Vuvuzelas.

fergie001:
Only an Aspirant who participated in the Primary can go to Court for that.

Unfortunately, he ran unopposed so nobody can challenge him.

Like the Shettima double nomination case, it is dead.

See the APC knows it is no case but they want to distract and throw LP off-balance hoping something will stick.

I remember Uncle Wole dragging Livy Uzoukwu in 2019 that his registered name is Livinus and Justice Garba told Chief Wole that one of his counsels backing Buhari was in the same law class with Livy and knows him.

It's law and it's fun..... It's normal!

I know you are of the point of view that a petitioner cannot rely on the weak defence of the defendant to win his case, but do you still think that Obi’s case is “no case” with the weak defence that INEC and Tinubu put up?

Their witnesses kept implicating them in court.

Do you still hold same opinion of this case?

nedu666:
He is not from benue. During the clash between yorubas and hausas in sasha, omenka was supporting yorubas and threatening hausas but on threads of benue crisis, his internet does not work

A very pathetic lot.

ezechi242:
leave these ignoramus agbado people, thier has been extreem commotion in watsapp group since yesterdays KO from OBIs SANs.

Lol

Jogs1900:
This is left for the court to decide since there is no precedence to this .

It’s not about precedence, it’s about you citing the law that you want the judiciary to rely on.

Or do you want them to invent it?

Jogs1900:
Try to understand me.APC is saying that for your name not to be in the party register, it means you are not a member of that party.(They will argue this)
Now, since you are not a member of LP, you shouldn't have been their presidential candidate.
Since you are not a presidential candidate, you can't challenge the presidential election as a candidate.

If you look at it, LP lawyers objected to the admissibility of the party register as evidencet(Do you think they don't know what they are doing)
I'm sure till now, LP is yet to update it's party register with INEC to include Obis name.

I’ve asked you a question you are not answering.

Labour submitted their register on April 22 and held their presidential primaries on May 30.

Now, which law says Labour Party must not admit new members between April 22 and May 30?

Again, which law says even if someone joins within that timeframe, he’s not eligible to contest an election in that party?

Jogs1900:
If LP updates it's register, did they update the one they submitted to INEC?

Which law said the one with INEC should be updated?

GeneralPula:
Right..

But Obi is not a valid member..

After being taught, you are still refusing to learn?

fergie001:
I loved the back and forth arguments on my thread ...
And I learnt more, Kudos guys

https://www.nairaland.com/7753103/obi-not-member-labour-party

To end the matter is to browse through previous Supreme Court decisions.

Jurisdiction is like a gate to a house, which when closed, you cannot get access to that house.

No matter how finely delivered a judgement is, without jurisdiction it is null and void.

When the Principal relief in a case is without jurisdiction, it is incumbent that the suit filed be dismissed (SC in Tukur v Government of Gongola State 1989).

In the following decisions of the Supreme Court:

PDP v Sylva, PDP v Ortom, Agi v PDP, Ufomba v INEC, Onyeagocha v Onyewuchi, Ita Enang v Akanimo Udofia, PDP v Shettima...

The Apex Court has maintained one thing that leadership and membership issues are pre-election matters which the Court has no business with.

They are domestic affairs of the Political Party.

The Principal claim by the respondents touches on membership issues (the reason the register was tendered), hence will definitely be thrown out by the Court.

Again, the respondents has not shown any personal injury that Obi's membership or otherwise has caused them.

They are meddlesome interlopers, busybodies and have acted like paid mourners hired to cry more than bereaved (per Nweze in PDP v Ortom)

In PDP v Sylva, the Apex Court was apt.... It is not the responsibility of the Court to pick Candidates for the Party, neither is it the job for non-party members and worse still non-aspirants who didn't participate in the primaries of that party to intervene.

Thank you for this detailed analysis as always.

Garfield1
Lotanna2
GeneralPula

Lotanna2:
But you lied initially that tinubu presented no documents

Show me where I said that.

omenka:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CuUlUlDoH8S/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==
.

This is the kind of news you like to post on Nairaland.

But when Fulani herdsmen massacres hundreds of Benue indigenes, you will wrap your tail behind your nyash and become speechless.

Talk about double standard.

But news flash: no matter the level the menace of UGM gets, Benue State will always be behind all Southeast States.

Jogs1900:
That is one of the cases before the court.
This is the first time a political party will allow an usurper to be it's presidential candidate.


Let's wait and see .

For every law, the constitution provides the punishment for not obeying it.

That’s why you see things like 21 years imprisonment, 14, 10 years, etc.

For the elections, you see the Electoral Act specifying disqualification, 10million naira fine, etc, for some offences and for failure to keep to certain provisions.

Now, I ask again, why did the law stipulate as punishment for someone whose name was not found on the register submitted 30 days before elections? Or are you waiting for the judiciary to manufacture punishment out of the thin air for you?

GeneralPula:
Valid member - party members registered at INEC within the lawful time frame, according to law..

Invalid member - party members that are not registered at INEC within the lawful time frame, according to law..

Let’s suppose there’s any invalid members according to your definition.

Now, what did the law say it should happen to your “invalid members”?

Jogs1900:
Why did they not update his name in the party register.

If your name is not in the party register, it clearly shows you are not a member of that political party and that is what Apc lawyers are saying.
Let's see how they will prove that and the umpire is not aware.
Inec is the umpire here.

Have you seen the current Labour Party register and his name is not there?

Are you even aware that your APC is relying on Labour Party register as April 22, 2022? Are you aware?

Lotanna2:
Out of 50 witnesses,obi presented 13 without any polling unit agent or any voter.tinubu actually presented 18 documents which knocked off obi's watery claims

How many documents did Obi present again?🤔

GeneralPula:
Apc does not really have any big issue..

Not Obi, not Atiku was able to proved how they won..

Empty cases everywhere..

So you admit that Tinubu’s defence is empty?

Jogs1900:
Did he apply for waiver or not?

Do you have proof he was not?

GeneralPula:
Right..

Their can’t even be a waiver as waiver is only for valid party members..

Define valid and invalid members of a political party.

Jogs1900:
What Tinubu is saying is that Obi is not a LP member by presenting LP register hence no mandate to claim.
Even if there was a waiver, did they update the party register?NO
It's not debatable.

Which law said a political party should update its register after submitting to INEC?

After Peter Obi closed his case after calling 13 witnesses out of the 50 witnesses he had told the court he would call, Tinubu supporters were all over Nairaland taunting Obi for not being able to call his witnesses which would affect his case; in fact that Obi has a bad case.

Now, fast forward to when it was Tinubu’s turn to defend his purported victory, he was only able to call just one witness out of the 39 he had told the court he would be calling. Just 1 witness. That’s why I want to ask, where are the rest?

APC on the other hand closes their own defence without presenting a single document nor a single witness. And we are left wondering what is going on?

Could it be because of how embarrassing that their witnesses have been in court?

Or could it be because nobody is willing to stick out his head for a supposed sitting president?

People gravitate to power and to people in power but in Tinubu’s case, people are deserting him to the extent that a proposed witness even refused to show up.

What this means is that the combination of INEC, Tinubu, Shettima and APC only provided two witnesses to testify against the myriads of testimonies and allegations against them.

Interesting days ahead.

All eyes on the judiciary!

IamAtikulate:
You even have time to educate them.

The funniest thing is that is their strongest case against PO

The reason I always do this is for the public to be aware of what the law provides so that the Judiciary can not erroneously hold onto it as the reason for whatever funny judgment they may have been paid to give.

Let the world see what the law provides.

That there’s no punishment for one’s name not being found in the party register.

And that APC supporters are rejoicing in ignorance and on hollow ground.

I’ve been seeing a lot of Tinubu supporters celebrating and rejoicing in ignorance because Tinubu’s lawyers submitted Labour Party membership register that Obi’s name was not in. So I thought it imperative to remind them that the Appeal Court had decided this particular case in a matter involving APM v Peter Obi where the Appeal Court, in unanimous judgment, dismissed the case.

But let’s try to understand what is in contention…

What Tinubu’s lawyers are contending is that Obi’s name was not in the register Labour Party submitted to INEC.

Now, the section of the Electoral Act that talked about submission of Party Register is Section 77(3)[/]

Section 77(3) states, inter alia, “[b]Each political party shall make such register available to the commission not later than 30 days before the date fixed for the party primaries, congresses or convention.” Full Stop, nothing more, nothing less.

What I’m saying is that that section did not state what the consequence for not submitting such register would be nor did it state that only those whose names were found in such register would be eligible for election.

Notice that the sections before Section 77 attached punishments for failing on the provision but Section 77 did not. So, does APC want the court to manufacture a punishment for them?

Again, every political party has power of waiver. Waiver is like the Presidential Prerogative of Mercy that can declare a criminal innocent by mere rule Presidential Signature irrespective of the court.

What this means is that a political party can grant waiver to whomsoever they will and present same person as candidate as there’s no law against it anywhere in Nigeria.

From records, Labour Party submitted their register to INEC on April 22, 2022 while they held their presidential primaries on May 29, 2022. Now, can Tinubu supporters point to any law that says that Political Parties can no longer register new members after submitting their register to INEC?

The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja has dismissed an appeal by the Allied Peoples Movement, APM, seeking to disqualify Peter Obi, the presidential candidate of the Labour Party, LP, from the February 25 general election.

In the appeal marked: CA/ABJ/CV/1414/2022, the Movement had approached the court, contending that the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, ought not to have recognized Peter Obi as a valid candidate for the presidential poll.

APM said this was in consideration of the time Obi defected from the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, to the LP.

The party argued that the period of Obi’s defection for the purpose of contesting the presidential election was in violation of sections 77(2) and (3) of the Electoral Act, 2022.

They also argued that before Obi’s defection, the LP already sent a list of its registered members to the INEC.

According to the appellant, Obi lacked the right to be recognized as the LP flagbearer because his name was not on the list of the party members that was submitted to INEC.

APM further urged the court to set aside the Federal High Court judgment which dismissed the suit it filed to challenge Obi’s candidacy.

In a unanimous decision by a three-member panel of Justices, the appellate court said there was no merit in the appeal filed by APM.

The appellate court, however, held that the suit was not an abuse of the judicial process, waving aside the argument by both Obi and the LP that the suit was statute barred.

The court noted that whereas Obi resigned from the PDP on May 24, 2022, INEC published his name as a candidate for the LP on September 20, 2022.

It equally noted that the APM, being a registered party, filed its suit on September 30, 2022 after the publication of Obi’s name.

“Since the suit was filed exactly 11 days after Obi’s name was published by INEC, it was not caught by the 14 days limitation stipulated in Section 285 (9) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, and therefore not statute barred,” it held.

The court held that by INEC publishing Obi’s name, “it has done no more than comply with provisions of the Electoral Act”.

Also, the appellate court held that though the APM alleged that Obi’s name was not on the register the LP submitted to INEC, it failed to present the said register in evidence.

Consequently, the appellate court struck out the suit and all the reliefs the party sought before the trial court and awarded a sum of N200,000 each, to both LP and Obi.

The panel, which was led by the President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Monica Dongbam-Mensem, also had Justices Danlami Senchi and Ugochukwu Ogakwu.

https://dailypost.ng/2023/02/08/appeal-court-dismisses-apms-suit-seeking-peter-obis-disqualification/?amp=1

By that singular admittance, INEC fell into a bottomless pit of trap set by the Labour Party’s Lawyer.

The man below is a senior lawyer and he shares his view about that.

At the resumed hearing of the Petition of the Labour Party and Peter Obi against INEC, Tinubu, Shettima and APC, INEC was finally able to open their defence as their witness did not have “domestic issues” today.

INEC witness today was the same Deputy Director of ICT at INEC, Lawrence Bayode, who testified for INEC in PDP’s case.

After adopting his witness statement, it was time for cross examinations by parties.

When it the turn of the Labour Party, cross examination was handled by PIN Ikwueto SAN.

First, under cross examination, PIN Ikwueto asked the witness why INEC went ahead to deploy the IREV for the elections if it had “vulnerabilities” (recall the many claims of threats of hackers and all by INEC and government agencies).

To this the witness replied that the IREV “had no vulnerability.”

Furthermore into the cross examination, Mr Ikwueto handed an INEC certified IREV result sheet and asked, “what is the score of APC in this result sheet?”

INEC Witness: ”I don’t know, the results are blurry.”

And that was how INEC admitted in court that its document is blurry.

Now, the question is where did it get the numbers to announce the winner it announced?

Remember: ”The aim is not to trust the judiciary, the aim is to overwhelm them with evidence”.

Fair enough.

Wike already had his way at the House of Rep.

lawrenzooo:
I result is fake from all information available in public domain. However JAMB should at least investigate further to find out whether the girl was aware/involved in the process that led to the falsification of her result, if she is then punishment can follow.

You are right.