₦airaland Forum

garfield1:
Before a case is heard on merit,you must first tackle the technicalities which is equally germane...
The case was rightly trashed but it cannot be refiled as time has lapsed...
Secondly,the legality of the primary or who monitored it was not in contention

I see. It’s very likely to me that should Lawan win the loser will raise the legality of the primaries up in court as a point of appeal.

Afamed:
TOOOR.

Supreme court is not a place where you win with emotions and sentiments,

You have to come with facts, figures and evidence.

Those commenting below and above are too lazy to read

lol..so you read everything... you get time ooo

To the court

- Machina accused APC of forgery and it must be proved, but he failed to prove it
- The election of Bashir Sheriff, Alhaji Bashir Sheriff, Bashir Sheriff Machina, and Bashir Sherrif were not one and the same. There is a need to confirm which of the Bashirs was nominated and elected.
- The election held on May 28 2022 was not for Yobe North Senatorial seat but for ZONE C, which was not known to law. So, Bashir Sheriff Machina or any other person nominated at that election cannot claim to be nominated for Yobe North Senatorial Seat
- The election held on 9 June 2022, though not observed by INEC, is valid as the committee given the task had earlier given that day for a revised election for the Yobe North Senatorial election.
- All the documents purported to be submitted or alleged to be from APC for the election were unsigned and undated, including the result sheet. And in law, such unsigned and undated documents are not counted or accepted as valid documents
- Citing different cases from Nigeria to England, and to some African countries, the court stated that the preliminary court and appellate courts were wrong in not accessing both the fulcrum of the case as per forgery and others. For that, the judgements given by the lower courts were set aside and the appeal of the APC was sustained.

Actions
- Any name submitted by APC should be recognised
- Machina can still correct any errors in his name and affidavit, but time has elapsed for such matter to be reviewed by the lower courts. It is over!
- The Court did not deny Machina his mandate, but he failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the mandate belongs to him. The court will not give you a property that bears your name but you are not the rightful owner


My Take

- The Supreme Court is not to blame, as the alternate decision for a review of the cases is already time-bound and elapsed
- When pursuing a Court case, employ sound and technical savvy lawyers to help you prosecute your case
- Review the existing laws to make sure that the owner of a property is not denied his rights due to technicalities
- Where statutes or cases are time-bound, the law can give the Supreme Court the right to make a pronouncement for an extension, if necessary

Que Sera Sera

garfield1:
Did you read it

How else am I supposed to defends my doctorate thesis, if I don't read it?!

Afamed:
TOOOR.

Supreme court is not a place where you win with emotions and sentiments,

You have to come with facts, figures and evidence.

Those commenting below and above are too lazy to read

O ya summarise for us

lordkush:
Apc turned legislative arm to rubber stamp


Now they have destroyed Supreme Court.

What sort of nonsense judgment is this

Please you people should just manage the Judiciary, legislative and executive arms, very soon God will destroy the tents of APC , they are enemy of the country

Iolo:
Yes. That part made sense. However, he should have been given the opportunity to refill using the proper channel is my point. It wasn’t his fault his lawyers used the wrong channel. Also, how does INEC interpret this judgement since recognizing Lawan also means they are flouting the Electoral Act.

I think there is a time limit for filing pre-election matters in court and that time has passed.

Interesting read but it is was a calamotous case.summary of the read


It boiled down to various things (mostly technicality which lead to ......)

It so happens that the APC and INEC were the culprits and felons in the case

Simply because the APC bungled it's primaries in the sight of inec and the supreme court just said [b] how do you want the court to prove electoral fraud when you did not ask us to judge electoral fraud >we are not inec nor the APC NWC

garfield1:
Machina commenced his suit wrongly

thank you sir for d info

Iolo:
Yes. That part made sense. However, he should have been given the opportunity to refill using the proper channel is my point. It wasn’t his fault his lawyers used the wrong channel. Also, how does INEC interpret this judgement since recognizing Lawan also means they are flouting the Electoral Act.

Inec will have to draft a proper guideline for primary to include guidelines for omissions and additions.
If a party under convention to elect candidates must must have received legal documents that allowscthat candidates name to only appear in one register to contest.immediately the particular candidates name appears in two registers.it automatically denotes fraud and the candidates disqualified.leaving the second name on the list to be duly nominated etc

Iolo:
Disgraceful judgement to say the least. How is it fair or equitable to ignore the merit of a case and base a judgement on a technicality that can’t be faulted to Machina. Does this mean a murder suspect is to be set free because the prosecution appealed using the wrong process?

The Supreme Court judges need to stop these technicality based judgements and give judgements that the lower courts can learn from and refer to. It’s appalling no one can predict how the Supreme Court will judge a case as their judgements are no longer based on the law but in the technicality of court rules and processes.

But technicality is part of law! Machina Lawyers goofed. After reading through this judgement, you can not blame the Supreme Court but Machina Lawyers

baralatie:
Inec will have to draft a proper guideline for primary to include guidelines for omissions and additions.
If a party under convention to elect candidates must must have received legal documents that allowscthat candidates name to only appear in one register to contest.immediately the particular candidates name appears in two registers.it automatically denotes fraud and the candidates disqualified.leaving the second name on the list to be duly nominated etc

Ok. This makes sense.

Supreme Court is setting a dangerous precedent, they are downplaying the role of INEC in primary election and at the same time thwarting the constitution. Alhaji is a religious title which one attains, no one is born with the name Alhaji... They are disgracing our constitution. Reason Buhari no dey see them

Freebills12:
Supreme Court is setting a dangerous precedent, they are downplaying the role of INEC in primary election and at the same time thwarting the constitution. Alhaji is a religious title which one attains, no one is born with the name Alhaji... They are disgracing our constitution. Reason Buhari no dey see them

First of all
Was there a case before the courts to disqualify lawan based on fraud by either inec or machina?
Because the supreme court is saying the case before the court was wrongly initiated
For example you caught a thief with stolen goods and went to court and charge him unlawful entry.if the thief now says the door was open and he pleaded with security to use the rest room.will the court now charge him for robbery

Justice Agim, I know and know to be a justice of the highest calibre and integrity.

While I will consider the text of the judgment myself, the mere fact that he dissented to the majority judgment gives me reason to doubt its correctness.

Lifestone:
But technicality is part of law! Machina Lawyers goofed. After reading through this judgement, you can not blame the Supreme Court but Machina Lawyers

It is well-settled, even by this same Supreme Court, that technicalities ought not to stand in the way of justice.

To me
It boils down to lapses in inec guidelines for nominations ,registrations of candidates.and omissions and additions.
As of now ,parties ommit and add names on pre nominations to get candidates like kilode.
One party will have two ,three names at the same time vying for posts.now see the result.

SmartyPants:
It is well-settled, even by this same Supreme Court, that technicalities ought not to stand in the way of justice.

Which judgement was that?

[color=#000099][/color]

baralatie:
First of all
Was there a case before the courts to disqualify lawan based on fraud by either inec or machina?
Because the supreme court is saying the case before the court was wrongly initiated

Yes there was a case of APC submitting Lawan's name after Machina have won the primary. APC said that they conducted another primary which produced Lawan.
The constitution is clear on this one has to participate in a primary election monitored by the INEC, a letter of withdrawal by the candidate who won has to be submitted to the INEC & also death of the candidate in question... Non these took place.
Supreme Court is interested in technicalities, whether Alhaji is in his name or not thereby neglecting the constitution.

Long write up just to justify there selfish self. Shame to Supreme Court

Freebills12:
[color=#000099][/color]

Yes there was a case of APC submitting Lawan's name after Machina have won the primary.

APC said that they conducted another primary which produced Lawan.

The constitution is clear on this one has to participate in a primary election monitored by the INEC
, a letter of withdrawal by the candidate who won has to be submitted to the INEC & also death of the candidate in question... Non these took place.
Supreme Court is interested in technicalities, whether Alhaji is in his name or not thereby neglecting the constitution.

Can you see why the supreme court said the initiation of the case from the lower was a bad route? Because they were suppose to charge lawan for fraud and INEC and APC stood by as accomplis

garfield1:
Its like ogah is supporting ahiwe

He has denied it.

Waiting for the full text concerning akpabio.

Wether the same APC and INEC ganged up again to perform another primary!

It will tell a lot about the inadequacy of inec to conduct elections

[color=#000099][/color]

baralatie:
Can you see why the supreme court said the initiation of the case from the lower was a bad route? Because they were suppose to charge lawan for fraud and INEC and APC stood by as accomplis

Charging Lawan for a lesser offence is not enough reason to make him (Lawan) a winner. Machina prays court to validate his mandate! The Supreme Court is interested in technicalities not the offence! Machina raised a point of order in reference to the constitution that one can't seat for two primaries in the same election but they trash it away! This case will never be referred to, it's just like Imo State gubernatorial case between Hope Uzodimma and Ihedioha

SmartyPants:
It is well-settled, even by this same Supreme Court, that technicalities ought not to stand in the way of justice.

It's really sad, very sad

Judges can write a library on a case to defend the "conclusion*

Freebills12:
[color=#000099][/color]

Charging Lawan for a lesser offence is not enough reason to make him (Lawan) a winner. Machina prays court to validate his mandate! The Supreme Court is interested in technicalities not the offence! Machina raised a point of order in reference to the constitution that one can't seat for two primaries in the same election but they trash it away! This case will never be referred to, it's just like Imo State gubernatorial case between Hope Uzodimma and Ihedioha

The supreme court did not trash his contention of lawans name been in two primaries!
The supreme court said because of the manner of initiating the case the court cannot answer the case of fraud by lawan.seeing that lawan is also claiming the same party and INEC as witnesses!
You get the problem now.
Machina and lawan are both claiming mandate using the same apac and INEC
But no one brought or initiated the case for the supreme to declare fraud in the elections.
That is why you keep seeing originatiating summons and writ summons!
That is why the APC and INEC were able to stand and look without doing anything


Hope and ihediiha is the same problem.hooe just came with electoral votes and said inec validated it.shuu.what do you want the supreme court to do unvalidated it.


The case is painfully but it shows the problem of inec and parties with respect to the needfor an update guideline


Parties can wake and announce primaries to be held in ten different locations .what do you want inec to do


And when this parties come with multiple primaries .you no want inec and court to do something new

baralatie:
Which judgement was that?

A plethora. This is the googleable one:

Salawu Ajide v Kadiri Kelani (1985) 1 NWLR 248 AT 269, Oputa J.S.C, on the need for truth to prevail in order to ensure justice is done poignantly cautioned that “justice is much more than a game of hide and seek. It is an attempt to discover the truth, on human imperfections, notwithstanding. Justice will never decree anything in favour of so slipperyj a customer as the present defendant/appellant” on this note, our courts have admitted that justice and truth are on the same ticket and that in doing justice the courts and all ministers in her temple, that is lawyers and all other stakeholders, must strive at discovering the truth regardless of legal technicalities”.

However i will update this post when i have time to find the appropriate leading authority.

So the real question how do you determine a legit primary conduct of elections when the same party is been alleged to have conducted it

baralatie:
So the real question how do you determine a legit primary conduct of elections when the same party is been alleged to have conducted it

By reference to the constitition of the party.

SmartyPants:
A plethora. This is the googleable one:

Salawu Ajide v Kadiri Kelani (1985) 1 NWLR 248 AT 269, Oputa J.S.C, on the need for truth to prevail in order to ensure justice is done poignantly cautioned that “justice is much more than a game of hide and seek. It is an attempt to discover the truth, on human imperfections, notwithstanding. Justice will never decree anything in favour of so slipperyj a customer as the present defendant/appellant” on this note, our courts have admitted that justice and truth are on the same ticket and that in doing justice the courts and all ministers in her temple, that is lawyers and all other stakeholders, must strive at discovering the truth regardless of legal technicalities”.

However i will update this post when i have time to find the appropriate leading authority.

Ok

garfield1:
What if the person that came first was not qualified to write

Then the 1st position automatically goes to the 2nd person.