Faber:


Na here go kill INEC and APC watch out. You think say you go school, you wise pass us abi?

The court will not crown your candidate a winner because he says he's a good man , you think he's the best for the job or not to hurt your feelings.

He who alleges must prove.

Its your opinion based on your interpretation of the law

ethikallyright:


It's an "opinion" based on the law.
You're free to have yours 👍

DMerciful:
Its your opinion based on your interpretation of the law

These are basic principles of the relevant statutes. They are the A B C of the Law. The court won't interprete differently because they are not contentious.

kk2027:
Tell emilokan to rule naija no be by force

Nigerians were thrown into mourning since Tuesday because of one man's ambition

For the first time in history, a president was declared and no one is jubilating anywhere

Where are the imaginary 8 million people that voted emilokan

Na your family Dey mourn

0monnak0da:

Interesting

The controversy is not about whether it is a state but whether it has some kind of exalted status
Which requires that 25% must be secured there no matter what. That would still be argued even if it were not considered to be a state

The tribunal will interprete the relevant constitutional provision to determine whether Abuja counts as a State for the purpose of determining compliance with the 24% in 24 states requirements.

The appeal court will not embark on an inquisition that has no basis in the constitution, ie whether Abuja should have an 'exalted status ' as you put it.

There is nothing special about residents of Abuja that would justify their effectively having a veto over who becomes the President.

Do Abuja residents pay a higher tax rate than residents of Jalingo, Ilorin, Owerri or Warri?

They're not and this clearly shows you're biased. Olisah Agbakoba, SAN came on channels long before election to say he cannot for certainty define whether getting 25% of Abuja is compulsory or not. INEC former rep Igini said its compulsory.

Do you know more than these guys? Are you a SAN?

ethikallyright:


These are basic principles of the relevant statutes. They are the A B C of the Law. The court won't interprete differently because they are not contentious.

DMerciful:
They're not and this clearly shows you're biased. Olisah Agbakoba, SAN came on channels long before election to say he cannot for certainty define whether getting 25% of Abuja is compulsory or not. INEC former rep Igini said its compulsory.

Do you know more than these guys? Are you a SAN?

Yes. If it was 100% certain, I wouldn't put it as one of the legal issues. It's still a SAN that the oppositions employ who will bring up the issue

However, the honourable justices of the court of appeal and probably the supreme court are more likely to be consistent with their interpretation of the FCT as a State . It's a 95:5 scenario.

'At the Tribunal'. That's fine.

Peter Obi won at the Tribunal ', and his victory was confirmed at the Appeal Court in 2006. And those are not the final stop.

At some point, witnesses will play a role; so the onus is on Labour Party's legal team to prove beyond reasonable doubt that INEC was complicit in declaring false results and covering their tracks; hereby rendering all of their documentation used in declaring the winner unreliable.

The 25% clause is not the bane of the matter; it is at most secondary as the figures presented by INEC are what will be contested. If this is proven, then the 25% matter does not exist.

Who cares

blabulu2000:
When I saw a video where Obi was speaking about some comments on nairaland ....then I know Obi Peter also is a subscriber on nairaland...

He's a regular member of the romance section and betting thread.

DMerciful:
They're not and this clearly shows you're biased. Olisah Agbakoba, SAN came on channels long before election to say he cannot for certainty define whether getting 25% of Abuja is compulsory or not. INEC former rep Igini said its compulsory.

Do you know more than these guys? Are you a SAN?

Which Mike Igini? That vulcaniser who used old age to study law after wasting his early years.
Falana is a SAN and he said it is not compulsory.

The Supreme Court has said the FCT is like a state. It is not compulsory.
By the time the Supreme Court tells you again that it is not compulsory, I expect you Obidients to start cursing the Supreme Court Justices.

Immatex:

At this point, its very unlikely Tinubu will relinquish power to anyone no matter what the courts rule.

The deed is already done!

Those who were out-witted should just move-on.

And for how long should we continue on this dangerous path.

You are not wise at all.

AbdulMagaji:


And for how long should we continue on this dangerous path.

You are not wise at all.

I hope you're not one of the people who supported Buhari when he disobeyed the Supreme Court ruling on the naira issue

Calm down. The Supreme Court needs to give a judgment on this and 50 other counts

Wickedfacts:


Which Mike Igini? That vulcaniser who used old age to study law after wasting his early years.
Falana is a SAN and he said it is not compulsory.

The Supreme Court has said the FCT is like a state. It is not compulsory.
By the time the Supreme Court tells you again that it is not compulsory, I expect you Obidients to start cursing the Supreme Court Justices.

DMerciful:
Calm down. The Supreme Court needs to give a judgment on this and 50 other counts

There's already a judgment on it. You are arguing because you lack knowledge of the existing judgment.

There is no judgment on this. Provide a link

Wickedfacts:


There's already a judgment on it. You are arguing because you lack knowledge of the existing judgment.

DeLaRue:


The tribunal will interprete the relevant constitutional provision to determine whether Abuja counts as a State for the purpose of determining compliance with the 24% in 24 states requirements.

The appeal court will not embark on an inquisition that has no basis in the constitution, ie whether Abuja should have an 'exalted status ' as you put it.

There is nothing special about residents of Abuja that would justify their effectively having a veto over who becomes the President.

Do Abuja residents pay a higher tax rate than residents of Jalingo, Ilorin, Owerri or Warri?

I am not a Lawyer but the argument of 25% of FCT is very very illogical to me. Does it mean if 36 states in Nigeria votes a single person as a president, residents of Abuja can vote it.

DMerciful:
There is no judgment on this. Provide a link

I presented a judgment before your eyes and you don't even understand what you are reading.
You really should not be discussing legal arguments when you can't even decipher what is written in plain English.

That is a Supreme Court judgment. The name of the parties is there. Citation is at the bottom.

If ordinary law report you can't even read, what makes you think you possess the capacity to make sound legal arguments?
SMH

Section 135(1) of the Electoral Act 2022 is quoted below: “An election shall not be liable to be invalidated by reason of non-compliance with the provisions of this Act if it appears to the Election Tribunal or Court that the election was conducted substantially in accordance with the principles of this Act and that the non-compliance did not affect substantially the result of the election.”

Let us see how Peter Obi and Atiku will convince the court that non transmission of results from polling units to IREV substantially affected the result of the election.

OP, don't be quick to speak for tribunal, they know their job more than you and they will do their job neatly so park well let them decide. It's too early to congratulate a man sitting on a stolen mandate

ethikallyright:
THE OPPOSITIONS’ CHANCES ARE SLIM AT THE TRIBUNAL: A LEGAL OPINION


I hereby congratulate His Excellency Bola Ahmed Tinubu of the All Progressive Congress (APC) who was declared the President-elect of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on the 1ST of March 2023 in accordance with the provisions of section 134 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999.

The major opposition parties are not satisfied with the outcome of the February 25th 2023 election and have vowed to approach the Election Tribunal to clear their doubts. Based on conversations on the streets and virtual society, my legal opinion on select issues are discussed briefly below.

Legal Issues

1. Where does the Presidential Election Tribunal start and who are the judges that make up the tribunal?

2. Whether images/pictures of result sheets will be admissible by the tribunal as evidence?

3. Whether the election will be declared void or cancelled because the regulations guiding transmission of the results was not complied with?

4. Whether 25% of votes cast in the Federal Capital Territory is a prerequisite to become the President of Nigeria?


1. Where does the Presidential Election Tribunal start and who are the judges that make up the tribunal?

Section 239 (1)(a) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 establishes the Court of Appeal of Nigeria as the Presidential Election Tribunal (See also section 130(2)(b) of the Electoral Act 2022). The venue of the court will most likely be the Court of Appeal (Abuja Judicial Division). Not less than 3 justices of the Court of Appeal will be members of the Presidential Election Tribunal (see section 247 of CFRN 1999). The tribunal must have been set up 30 days before the elections in accordance with section 130 (3)(a) of the Electoral Act 2022.


2. Whether images/pictures of result sheets will be admissible by the tribunal as evidence?

The answer is no. Pictures of results taken or downloaded whether by party agents or electorates will not be admissible as evidence in court. The admissible documentary evidence in court is the result sheet itself as will be presented by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) (See sections 86, 88 and 102 of the Evidence Act 2011). Since the result sheet is a public document (section 102 of the Evidence Act), if it is missing a certified true copy will be tendered in accordance with section 90 (1) ( c ) of the Evidence Act. Electronic evidence from the BVAS system or Ires/INEC’s website can only be tendered by INEC because only the Commission can satisfy the conditions of tendering Electronic Evidence laid down by Section 84 of the Evidence Act and emphasized in the case of Kubour v. Dickson.


3. Whether the election will be declared void or cancelled because the regulations guiding transmission of the results was not complied with?

The answer is most likely no although it is subject to the discretion of the tribunal. Section 135(1) of the Electoral Act 2022 is quoted below:

“An election shall not be liable to be invalidated by reason of non-compliance with the provisions of this Act if it appears to the Election Tribunal or Court that the election was conducted substantially in accordance with the principles of this Act and that the non-compliance did not affect substantially the result of the election.”

The provision quoted above means that even if INEC does not conduct the election exactly as stated in the Act, the election will be valid as long as the provisions violated did not affect the result of the election “substantially”.

4. Whether 25% of votes cast in the Federal Capital Territory is a prerequisite to become the President of Nigeria?

The answer is no. Section 134 of CFRN 1999 states that a candidate must not have “less than one-quarter of the votes cast at the election in each of at least two-thirds of all the States in the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja” to become the President of Nigeria. That provision must be read together with section 299 of the same constitution which gives the FCT, Abuja, the status of a state. The court of Appeal will not deviate from the decision of the Supreme Court in Bakare v. Ogundipe (2021) where the supreme court reiterated the status of the FCT Abuja as a state in accordance with section 299 of CFRN 1999. Even in the classical case of Shagari V. Awolowo, the Supreme Court of Nigeria counted “Lagos State” which was then the seat ofgovernment as a state to determine whether the candidates had 25% in the required states.

where a statue specifically provided a way of doing things ,you can not do it in any other way,the 25% for fct was a specific Constitutional provision you can not wish away, for administrative purposes fct can be regarded as a state,but for the purpose of election the constitution has prescribed the status of fct, the fct was specifically mentioned, while others were lumped together as states

AbdulMagaji:


And for how long should we continue on this dangerous path.

You are not wise at all.

Wise man that know not when to let go. Use that your wisdom become Chief Judge of the Federation.

kk2027:
Tell emilokan to rule naija no be by force

Nigerians were thrown into mourning since Tuesday because of one man's ambition

For the first time in history, a president was declared and no one is jubilating anywhere

Where are the imaginary 8 million people that voted emilokan

People should go on the street so that igbos would use the opportunity to cause problems, destroy property and loot abi? You plans failed

Jack500:


Keep fooling yourself, so no one voted for him?

You ibos should Sha try nonsense, 1967 will be a child's play

unfortunately Nigeria will be balkanize to smaller pieces nobody will go to war against the Ibos. We faught them in 1967 but today with all these injustices it will only you the yorubas and the Hausa that will fight all other tribes will not. the middle belt will not know this and have peace. The deltans; we the Isoko and Urhobos will not. If war is faught there should be genuine reconciliation and give all side the opportunity to rule not rigging them out like thieves and you expect your pay master to be addressed as your excellency.

The injustice against the Ibos because of a war faught decades ago is unacceptable to people that have brain to think

Maazieze:
On point 3, what measure of noncompliance with electoral procedures is needed for it to be considered "substantial"?

This is a very good question I was hoping to ask myself but let me put it in perspective.

There are over 176800 polling units in Nigeria so even if you have skirmishes in 10000 polling units across the country….it is still less than 6% of the PU so most probably not substantial. I doubt we had skirmishes in up to 5000PU

But let’s watch and see.

Jack500:


Keep fooling yourself, so no one voted for him?

You ibos should Sha try nonsense, 1967 will be a child's play

What brought Igbo into this matter now, oponu

Jack500:


Keep fooling yourself, so no one voted for him?

You ibos should Sha try nonsense, 1967 will be a child's play

it is only you and your family that will fight because me as a Yoruba man will not join you to fight a war of a stolen mandate.

ethikallyright:


.

The authority of Shagari v Awolowo came in because a school of thought suggests that the draftsmen of the constitution intended 25% in the FCT because it is the"seat of power" and the President stays there.

I do not comprehend this point. What is the relevance of where the president stays?
The issue is interpretation of the words

2/3 of all the states AND the FCT
Some commentators have suggested an interpretation that would mean if a candidate gets 100% from 36 states and 24% in Abuja the candidate has not win
Interpretation of that is the issue

blabulu2000:



I'm not a prophet of doom. But from today's labor party press conference where obi spoke...

What I can deduce from what he said is this;


The court should make him (Obi Peter)/the president of Nigeria. or the country will.go aflame....so, let everyone in the country prepare for the doom days ahead...if Obi is not sworn in...

My brother....be prepared....

highest they'll burn their South East.

Jack500:


Keep fooling yourself, so no one voted for him?

You ibos should Sha try nonsense, 1967 will be a child's play

Are you not ashamed of using Nigeria (a nation of over 300tribes) to always threaten the IGBOS? What actually happened to your tribe?, Ohhh!! I forgot you are cowards.

Maazieze:
On point 3, what measure of noncompliance with electoral procedures is needed for it to be considered "substantial"?

The judges will have to define and justify the extent of non-compliance and if it was substantial. Section 135 of the Electoral Act makes their job easy.

Excerpts from SC Judgement Awolowo v Shagari

It finally held that even though it had been found that there was non-compliance with the provisions of Section 34A(1)(c)(ii) of the Decree, the provision of Section III subsection 1 will be evoked, which provides that non-compliance with part II will not affect the result of the election