₦airaland Forum

fergie001:
See, the Constitution is the Supreme document that guides our laws.

The paraphrased sentence is clearly as it regards to the qualifying and disqualifying factors of the Executive.

A very detailed reading of S187 is clear.....

(1) In any election to which the foregoing provisions of this part of this Chapter relate a candidate for the office of Governor of a State shall not be deemed to have been validly nominated for such office unless he nominates another candidate as his associate for his running for the office of Governor, who is to occupy the office of Deputy Governor; and that candidate shall be deemed to have been duly elected to the office of Deputy Governor if the candidate who nominated him is duly elected as Governor in accordance with the said provisions.

(2) The provisions of this Part of this Chapter relating to qualification for election, tenure of office, disqualifications, declaration of assets and liabilities and Oath of Governor shall apply in relation to the office of Deputy Governor as if references to Governor were references to Deputy Governor.

---

The same for VP in Section 142 but what is the time-frame?


Yes, they are tied for the purpose of election but was there a time-frame to make these appointments by the CFRN? No.

It is the EA that now buttresses the limitation factors of time. This same Act is silent on some of these things and only says that final list will be published 90 days to the election.

What this means is that, you can have 100 VPs withdraw and you replace them with the time-frame in mind.

IF the EA had said something like this:
...the political party to submit the name of a fresh candidate within 14 days of the withdrawal of the former candidate by conducting fresh primaries, or in the case of a vice presidential candidate or deputy governor, by selection.

It will have been a different matter.


I have explained this....
Does the Vice President or Deputy-Gov go through a fresh Primary election?

These are non-elective positions and the EA does not cover the field.

90 days to the election (that is Nov 25, 2022) will have been the deadline.

Quite uncharacteristic of you, in all these things you have said, you cited no case law to support your position which goes to prove that whatever you are saying here are mere conjectures.

Between primaries and appointment, which is more difficult?

Why should a more difficult and rigorous process have a 14 days timeline but the less rigorous left to run ad infinitum until 90 days to the election?

If president and governors are tied to their deputies by same umbilical chord, then whatever pertains to the nomination of the president or governor equally applies to their deputies.

This thing shouldn’t be difficult. Any other interpretation is a bizarre criminal arm-twisting of the law.

^{Just as an addendum, if my memories don't fail me.}

On 17th June 2022, the LP Presidential Candidate, Peter Obi chose Doyin Okupe as place-holder Vice Presidential Candidate.

Okupe sent his withdrawal letter on 07th July 2022 and Datti was unveiled/announced on July 08. Following Silas Joseph Onu's narrative, is it safe to say that Obi had no Vice from 07th-08th hence that is also invalid nomination?

So you see, it is not in our place to insert into our laws what is not. Hence, the NA has to go back and plug that hole.

In the bolded, you are now sounding like you are yet to understand the crux of what is in contest here, and by implication the APM case.

You just said Okupe withdrew on July 7th.

Datti was nominated on July 8th.

Difference in days: 1 day.

Balance by provision of law: +13 days.

In Tinubu’s case however….

Ibrahim Masari withdrew on June 24th.

Shettima got nominated on July 14th.

Difference in days: 21 days.

Deficit by provision of law: - 7 days.

Now, for exhausting the window provided in law within which to replace his running mate who withdrew, and extending it by 7 days, Tinubu invalidated his candidacy.

Do you have a full grasp now or you want more clarity?

GeneralDae:
INEC was just giving them deadlines for the sake of order. As long as every withdrawal is done 90 days before election, you are cool except those party candidates who do primary elections.

Read towards the end of this article in 2022.

"He said, “The political parties are just taking advantage of the provision of the Electoral Act: Section 33 permits the candidates to withdraw or an account of death, may be substituted. The political party will conduct another primary election. Or if he voluntarily withdraws, the political party that is affected “must” within 14 days conduct fresh primary elections to produce another candidate.

“However, in the case of vice-presidents and deputy governors, they don’t conduct primary for them, so the political parties see that as an opening that they can change the names anytime without conducting any primaries.

“That is what they are using but the Electoral Act itself is silent on it. I believe it is the primary that brings in the presidential and governorship candidate but when conducting that nobody talks about the vice-president or the deputy governorship elections".

https://punchng.com/presidential-poll-interim-running-mates-risky-ex-inec-chiefs-warn-apc-lp/?amp

You keep missing my point….

Even the title of your article has “risky” in it. And that’s former INEC staff warning of the dangers of the practice of having placeholders.

But my contention here, which is the provision of the law, is that whatever anyone is doing, new primary, appointment, selection, etc, MUST happen within 14 days.

Take note of the word MUST as used in the Electoral Act which goes to prove that there’s no room for malleability about that provision.

Whatever you are doing here are mere conjectures.

Penguin2:
You keep missing my point….

Even the title of your article has “risky” in it. And that’s former INEC staff warning of the dangers of the practice of having placeholders.

But my contention here, which is the provision of the law, is that whatever anyone is doing, new primary, appointment, selection, etc, MUST happen within 14 days.

Take note of the word MUST as used in the Electoral Act which goes to prove that there’s no room for malleability about that provision.

Whatever you are doing here are mere conjectures.

My article puts risky because they feared the candidates may refuse to step down. Remember it was both APC and LP who had placeholder at that time. If you read through the entire article that was the concern.

As to what I bolded in your reply, I don't think the law states that exactly as is made clear in my Punch article. It doesn't speak of selected/nominated candidates. If it does, then quote it fully for me. This is section 33 of the electoral act:

A political party shall not be allowed to change or substitute its candidate whose name has been submitted under section 29 of this Act, except in the case of death or
withdrawal by the candidate:
Provided that in the case of such withdrawal or death of a candidate, the political party affected shall, within 14 days of the occurrence of the event, hold a fresh primary election to produce and submit a fresh candidate to the Commission for the election concerned.

The bolded in my last reply from the article addresses your point, letting you know that the electoral act was silent on vice presidents and deputy Governors who are nominated and this was why both Tinubu and Obi were probably taking their time because they knew they could replace their placeholders anytime.

GeneralDae:
My article puts risky because they feared the candidates may refuse to step down. Remember it was both APC and LP who had placeholder at that time. If you read through the entire article that was the concern.

As to what I bolded in your reply, I don't think the law states that exactly as is made clear in my Punch article. It doesn't speak of selected/nominated candidates. If it does, then quote it fully for me. This is section 33 of the electoral act:

A political party shall not be allowed to change or substitute its candidate whose name has been submitted under section 29 of this Act, except in the case of death or
withdrawal by the candidate:
Provided that in the case of such withdrawal or death of a candidate, the political party affected shall, within 14 days of the occurrence of the event, hold a fresh primary election to produce and submit a fresh candidate to the Commission for the election concerned.

Section 29 does not address placeholders. Placeholders are not initially recorded as running mates.

The bolded in my last reply from the article addresses your point, letting you know that the electoral act was silent on vice presidents and deputy Governors who are nominated and this was why both Tinubu and Obi were probably taking their time because they knew they could replace their placeholders anytime.

Just answer a simple question….

If the presidential or governorship candidate which requires a more cumbersome process of new primaries MUST be replaced within 14 days in case of death or withdrawal, why do you think a less cumbersome process of selection should be allowed, in law, to run for a longer period?

Penguin2:
Just answer a simple question….

If the presidential or governorship candidate which requires a more cumbersome process of new primaries MUST be replaced within 14 days in case of death or withdrawal, why do you think a less cumbersome process of selection should be allowed, in law, to run for a longer period?

I don't think it applies but even if it does, this is what INEC said today in their written response to the Double nomination case:

Responding to allegations of Mr Shettima’s double nomination, Mr Mahmoud, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), said the APC had, in a letter dated 6 July 2022, received on 13 July 2022 by INEC, withdrawn his candidacy for Borno Central Senatorial District to clear the way for his nomination as Mr Tinubu’s running mate.

This means INEC has a letter dated 6th July 2023 (12 days after).

Supreme court also accepted this letter from INEC while dismissing the idea of double nomination in the case of the vice president. So end of story.

APM's case is useless and would likely be dismissed with a fine.

Finally, in case of double nomination, Supreme court also affirmed based on the letter of withdrawal from the senate Shettima filed that it was also dated 6th of July. This would mean Shettima through the APC in a letter to INEC withdrew his Senatorial bid to clear his way for nomination but the letter was received by INEC on 13th of July.

If the letter indicates that the reason for withdrawal from the senate was to clear his way to be nominated as VP then that settles it. The letter dated 6th July destroyed both cases.

GeneralDae:
I don't think it applies but even if it does, this is what INEC said today in their written response to the Double nomination case:

Responding to allegations of Mr Shettima’s double nomination, Mr Mahmoud, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), said the APC had, in a letter dated 6 July 2022, received on 13 July 2022 by INEC, withdrawn his candidacy for Borno Central Senatorial District to clear the way for his nomination as Mr Tinubu’s running mate.

This means INEC has a letter dated 6th July 2023 (12 days after).

Supreme court also accepted this letter from INEC while dismissing the idea of double nomination in the case of the vice president. So end of story.

APM's case is useless and would likely be dismissed with a fine.

The day Shettima became the Vice Presidential candidate of the APC is the day INEC received the letter nominating him as such. The date on the letter is immaterial. No law says letters must be delivered the day they are written.

And this response you are talking about is to DOUBLE NOMINATION while APM is contesting INVALID NOMINATION.

Need I remind you that Shettima was actually nominated on 6th July. But in trying to beat the DOUBLE NOMINATION trap, they got INEC to lie that they received the letter on the 13th of July, 2022. But in so doing, Tinubu and APC ran into INVALID NOMINATION for staying 6 days (outside the law) without a running mate.

Penguin2:
The day Shettima became the Vice Presidential candidate of the APC is the day INEC received the letter nominating him as such. The date on the letter is immaterial. No law says letters must be delivered the day they are written.

And this response you are talking about is to DOUBLE NOMINATION while APM is contesting INVALID NOMINATION.

Need I remind you that Shettima was actually nominated on 6th July. But in trying to beat the DOUBLE NOMINATION trap, they got INEC to lie that they received the letter on the 13th of July, 2022. But in so doing, Tinubu and APC ran into INVALID NOMINATION for staying 6 days (outside the law) without a running mate.

No you are wrong. The law says they must submit the name of the new candidate to INEC within 14 days.
That letter of withdrawal is what INEC has officially which is the letter from APC indicating that Shettima would be the VP. That's the letter the supreme court also took from INEC that defeats double nomination. Except you have another letter from the APC after that date tendering Shettima's name. If INEC received the letter 13th of July, then it's not the fault of the APC.

Section 33 once more says:

the political party affected shall, within 14 days of the occurrence of the event, hold a fresh primary election to produce and submit a fresh candidate to the Commission for the election concerned.


You see that the emphasis here is not when the candidate is officially unveiled to the public but when the new candidate is named and his name submitted to INEC.

In this case, the letter to INEC from APC is the evidence of submission and it was written 6th July.

So two points I have against your case:

1) I don't think Vice presidents and Deputy Governors were the focus of section 29 and 33.

2) Even if we agree they were, INEC says the letter they have from APC is on the 6th of July.

GeneralDae:
No you are wrong. The law says they must submit the name of the new candidate to INEC within 14 days.
That letter of withdrawal is what INEC has officially which is the letter from APC indicating that Shettima would be the VP. That's the letter the supreme court also took from INEC that defeats double nomination. Except you have another letter from the APC after that date tendering Shettima's name. If INEC received the letter 13th of July, then it's not the fault of the APC.

Section 33 once more says:

the political party affected shall, within 14 days of the occurrence of the event, hold a fresh primary election to produce and submit a fresh candidate to the Commission for the election concerned.


You see that the emphasis here is not when the candidate is officially unveiled to the public but when the new candidate is named and his name submitted to INEC.

In this case, the letter to INEC from APC is the evidence of submission and it was written 6th July.

So two points I have against your case:

1) I don't think Vice presidents and Deputy Governors were the focus of section 29 and 33.

2) Even if we agree they were, INEC says the letter they have from APC is on the 6th of July.

Lol!

You have moved from denying that Vice Presidents and Deputy Governors are bound by the 14 days to now arguing that APC actually beat the deadline. We are getting somewhere.

But I need to point out something to you, why are you dwelling on DOUBLE NOMINATION and ignoring the second leg of the case which is INVALID NOMINATION?

Need I remind you that the petitioners, Obi and LP, approached the court and petitioned Shettima on the basis of APC’s letter dated 6th July, 2022. Now, had INEC accepted that they received the letter on 6th July, Shettima will be guilty of double nomination.

But INEC, in trying to help APC, argued that even though APC’s letter is dated 6th July, they received it on 13th July.

Now, I want to ask you, in your thinking, when was Shettima nominated as APC Vice Presidential candidate in the eyes of the law?

Is it the day the letter was written (6th July)?

Or the day the letter was delivered to and acknowledged by INEC (13th July)?

Penguin2:
Lol!

You have moved from denying that Vice Presidents and Deputy Governors are bound by the 14 days to now arguing that APC actually beat the deadline. We are getting somewhere.

But I need to point out something to you, why are you dwelling on DOUBLE NOMINATION and ignoring the second leg of the case which is INVALID NOMINATION?

Need I remind you that the petitioners, Obi and LP, approached the court and petitioned Shettima on the basis of APC’s letter dated 6th July, 2022. Now, had INEC accepted that they received the letter on 6th July, Shettima will be guilty of double nomination.

But INEC, in trying to help APC, argued that even though APC’s letter is dated 6th July, they received it on 13th July.

Now, I want to ask you, in your thinking, when was Shettima nominated as APC Vice Presidential candidate in the eyes of the law?

Is it the day the letter was written (6th July)?

Or the day the letter was delivered to and acknowledged by INEC (13th July)?

If you read the supreme court's judgement on double nomination, they never quoted 13th July. They said the letter before them shows that Shettima withdrew on 6th July. They dismissed the case based on the fact that:

1) PDP has no locus standi.
2) This idea of double nomination for a VP makes no sense and even Atiku was doubly nominated by Obasanjo.

I can give you the full judgement here. In double nomination, the law spoke more of officials who should be elected.

This is a quote from the supreme court judgement too, they never banked on 13th of July for double nomination.

"Shettima withdrew his senate nomination on 6th July 2022 and was subsequently replaced. At this point, he was no longer a candidate for the Senate, and as such his position as vice president, did not constitute a multiple nomination breach".

This shows that even this Invalid nomination is easier to dismiss than double nomination argument.

Unperturbedpota:
You are just naive. The ANAP polls were correct Tinubu rugged himself in so what nonsense example are you quoting.

Anyways Tinubu is now jittery and the world knows the truth now cry more 🤣

Graduate indeed

Hopefully you will contribute to the hefty fine about to be hammered on APM for wasting the court’s time?

GeneralDae:
This shows that even this Invalid nomination is easier to dismiss than double nomination argument.

Keep deceiving yourself, Jobless Obidient, you Incoherent Children, are too oblivious, you never seem to learn?

Hopefully you will contribute to the hefty fine about to be hammered on APM for wasting the court’s time?

Obnoxious Mumurist.

Penguin2:
Quite uncharacteristic of you, in all these things you have said, you cited no case law to support your position which goes to prove that whatever you are saying here are mere conjectures.

Sometimes don't take things from what they say on Twitter or elsewhere, do some personal research. APM is filing a petition against APC's "placeholder"/substantive Candidate.

-This is a Party that filed its petition on March 20 but subpoenaed INEC on June 19.

-A Party that came overall last in the Presidential Election and seeks to show no injury the alleged whatever nomination will do to them.

- This is a Party whose sole witness openly told the tribunal that she didn't know when Shettima withdrew his Senatorial nomination.

- A Party that publicly backed another petitioner in the same election against the APC and you expect the tribunal that grant their prayer?

-This is a Party whose prayer in Court is to exclude Tinubu and uphold the Victory of Atiku Abubakar (laughable)

-This is a pre-election matter

-They have no jurisdiction

When the Supreme Court has ruled on the case, then what are you expecting?

In your heart of hearts, you know this invalid or whatever nomination will get APM a very good fine and will be so thrashed.

We will be here.

---

I quoted Sections of the Constitution, you say it is conjectures and you quoted Silas Joseph Onu.

I quoted case laws about FCT, you said... FCT is same as State administratively but above a State for the purpose of election.

I have been waiting for you to cite one, yet you cite people on Twitter.

If Tinubu is not disqualified by the Court, forget about justice in Nigeria.

Normally, I am not supposed to be reacting to people who make this kind of statements. Silas Onu is a lawyer, hopefully, he doesn't take any case before the Lord Justices.

That been the case, this matter has been foreclosed for me, pending judgement.

favor914:
Keep deceiving yourself, Jobless Obidient, you Incoherent Children, are too oblivious, you never seem to learn?

Hopefully you will contribute to the hefty fine about to be hammered on APM for wasting the court’s time?

Obnoxious Mumurist.

Is English your problem?😂

GeneralDae:
Is English your problem?😂

Ok sorry General Dae, wasn’t aware that you have a problem reading & comprehending the English language?

fergie001:
Sometimes don't take things from what they say on Twitter or elsewhere, do some personal research. APM is filing a petition against APC's "placeholder"/substantive Candidate.

-This is a Party that filed its petition on March 20 but subpoenaed INEC on June 19.

-A Party that came overall last in the Presidential Election and seeks to show no injury the alleged whatever nomination will do to them.

- This is a Party whose sole witness openly told the tribunal that she didn't know when Shettima withdrew his Senatorial nomination.

- A Party that publicly backed another petitioner in the same election against the APC and you expect the tribunal that grant their prayer?

-This is a Party whose prayer in Court is to exclude Tinubu and uphold the Victory of Atiku Abubakar (laughable)

-This is a pre-election matter

-They have no jurisdiction

When the Supreme Court has ruled on the case, then what are you expecting?

In your heart of hearts, you know this invalid or whatever nomination will get APM a very good fine and will be so thrashed.

We will be here.

---

I quoted Sections of the Constitution, you say it is conjectures and you quoted Silas Joseph Onu.

I quoted case laws about FCT, you said... FCT is same as State administratively but above a State for the purpose of election.

I have been waiting for you to cite one, yet you cite people on Twitter.

Normally, I am not supposed to be reacting to people who make this kind of statements. Silas Onu is a lawyer, hopefully, he doesn't take any case before the Lord Justices.

That been the case, this matter has been foreclosed for me, pending judgement.

In all my engagements with you, I have never relied on information from Twitter nor quote a Twitter source; never.

My position has always been informed by the constitution, the Electoral Act and the much I know of INEC guidelines.

So, it’s disingenuous to insinuate that people on Twitter inform my opinion.

Lastly, while I agree with you that the matter be foreclosed while we wait for judgment, I need you to know that nothing that happened prior to the election denies APM the right to seek redress in an election they validly participated in.

I think in 2015 or thereabout, an Appeal Court in Imo State voided an entire House of Rep election because an unknown character with one the now deregistered political parties, approached the court and argued that INEC unlawfully excluded him and his party from the election. Even though the court and everyone knew that he stood no chance in the election but the law is the law.

GeneralDae:
If you read the supreme court's judgement on double nomination, they never quoted 13th July. They said the letter before them shows that Shettima withdrew on 6th July. They dismissed the case based on the fact that:

1) PDP has no locus standi.
2) This idea of double nomination for a VP makes no sense and even Atiku was doubly nominated by Obasanjo.

I can give you the full judgement here. In double nomination, the law spoke more of officials who should be elected.

This is a quote from the supreme court judgement too, they never banked on 13th of July for double nomination.

"Shettima withdrew his senate nomination on 6th July 2022 and was subsequently replaced. At this point, he was no longer a candidate for the Senate, and as such his position as vice president, did not constitute a multiple nomination breach".

Read the encircled portion of the letter below 👇

That’s from INEC’s written address to the election petition tribunal.

Can you see them tell the court that they received Shettima’s nomination letter on 13th July, 2022?

Penguin2:
Read the encircled portion of the letter below 👇

That’s from INEC’s written address to the election petition tribunal.

Can you see them tell the court that they received Shettima’s nomination letter on 13th July, 2022?

The letter bearing the withdrawal from Senate to indicate Shettima's nomination for VP was dated 6th July. When INEC received it doesn't matter.

Double nomination was rather a stronger argument in this sense, this one doesn't fly.

Supreme court didn't even speak of 13th July in their final judgement. The 6th July letter is all they accepted as evidence in case of double nomination.

Penguin2:
Read the encircled portion of the letter below 👇

That’s from INEC’s written address to the election petition tribunal.

Can you see them tell the court that they received Shettima’s nomination letter on 13th July, 2022?

Oga,the apex court clearly said that shettima was never guilty of double nomination and that he submitted his letter to apc on the 6th of July and his resignation takes effect from there.who are you to counter them?
In jime vs hembe 2022 the apex court said multiple nomination is not about the sequence or signing of several nomination form but the intention to hold two or more candidature towards or during election.this case is dead as dodo

GeneralDae:
The letter bearing the withdrawal from Senate to indicate Shettima's nomination for VP was dated 6th July. When INEC received it doesn't matter.

Double nomination was rather a stronger argument in this sense, this one doesn't fly.

Supreme court didn't even speak of 13th July in their final judgement. The 6th July letter is all they accepted as evidence in case of double nomination.

Exactly.anything relating to nomination, substitution is preelection and internal

Lotanna2:
Exactly.anything relating to nomination, substitution is preelection and internal

These guys are very bad losers. It's unfortunate.

GeneralDae:
These guys are very bad losers. It's unfortunate.

Very very.he is obi supporter but harp on to any imaginary allegation against tinubu whether from obi or not

Lotanna2:
Very very.he is obi supporter but harp on to any imaginary allegation against tinubu whether from obi or not

All of them are sore losers.

You couldn't prove you won in court, so you look for every imaginary case from anywhere against Tinubu whether it makes sense or not. You just want to bamboozle the court with many cases to see if one can go through for disqualification, knowing already that you lost.

When the court dismisses all of the cases seeing how useless they all are, the next plan is to say Judiciary is compromised.

You lost, why not take your loss like a man?

GeneralDae:
The letter bearing the withdrawal from Senate to indicate Shettima's nomination for VP was dated 6th July. When INEC received it doesn't matter.

Double nomination was rather a stronger argument in this sense, this one doesn't fly.

Supreme court didn't even speak of 13th July in their final judgement. The 6th July letter is all they accepted as evidence in case of double nomination.

The bold sentence will be the trigger indicating that I have no need to further engage this individual.

00FFT00:
The bold sentence will be the trigger indicating that I have no need to further engage this individual.

Because you have no case in the first instance.

The name was pencilled down and sent to INEC within the 14 days period and that is also the letter before the supreme court.


Bookmark this post.

helinues:
See blackmailing. They blackmailed the voters, blackmailed INEC, SC is the next

So if SC disqualified Tinubu, Nigeria justice system is in order.. No wonder INEC is also not in order as their decision did not favour una.

Election can only be credible if they won

Political jobber..... Suffering and Smiling

Bola Amina Ahmed Adekunle Fatima Tinubu ti lule.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nP_7GnDyMzE

Penguin2:
“In trying to run away from DOUBLE NOMINATION, the APC ran into INVALID NOMINATION.”

After the Supreme Court ruled on PDP’s case on Shettima’s Double Nomination suit, most Nigerians wrote off the APM Petition at the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal as being a waste of court’s time but emerging facts about the details of their petition has shown that their petition might be the dark horse that might bite Tinubu and the APC the deepest.

First, a combined reading of the Constitution and the Electoral Act shows that any party whose candidates resigns after the closure of nomination process has the total of 14 days to replace such candidate.

Now, both INEC and APC and Tinubu accepted in court that Ibrahim Masari who was APC Vice Presidential placeholder candidate tendered his resignation on 24th June, 2022.

Again, all parties agree that Kashim Shettima became the new Vice Presidential candidate on 14th July, 2022 (because they were running from double nomination so they denied it was on 6th July).

Now, between 24 June, 2022 - 14 July, 2022 is a total period of 21 days. That’s a whopping 7 days beyond the constitutionally provided window of 14 days.

Now, APM is arguing that as of the time that Kashim Shettima was nominated as Vice Presidential candidate of the APC, Bola Tinubu had ceased to be a valid presidential candidate having stayed 7 days without a Vice Presidential candidate which invalidated his candidacy.

https://twitter.com/frankekechukwu/status/1680719876044849152?s=46&t=2AB_wrBea-oBYJf5ZCFV-A

Nlfpmod
Mynd44

GeneralDae:
The letter bearing the withdrawal from Senate to indicate Shettima's nomination for VP was dated 6th July. When INEC received it doesn't matter.

Double nomination was rather a stronger argument in this sense, this one doesn't fly.

Supreme court didn't even speak of 13th July in their final judgement. The 6th July letter is all they accepted as evidence in case of double nomination.

I’m your staff at work and I went against some of the company’s policy today being 19th July, 2023 and you tell me to go and put what happened in writing and bring to you within 24 hours.

Now, I failed to bring that letter within 24hours but on August 1, 2023, I brought a letter dated July 20, 2023.

When did you receive the letter?

On July 20 that the letter is dated which will exonerate of all disobedience?

Or on August 1 that the letter reached your desk which would mean that I disobeyed your directives by up to one week?

Lotanna2:
Oga,the apex court clearly said that shettima was never guilty of double nomination and that he submitted his letter to apc on the 6th of July and his resignation takes effect from there.who are you to counter them?
In jime vs hembe 2022 the apex court said multiple nomination is not about the sequence or signing of several nomination form but the intention to hold two or more candidature towards or during election.this case is dead as dodo

When did Ibrahim Masari withdraw his placeholder candidacy?

Penguin2:
When did Ibrahim Masari withdraw his placeholder candidacy?

Only inec or apc aspirants have the locus to sue

Penguin2:
I’m your staff at work and I went against some of the company’s policy today being 19th July, 2023 and you tell me to go and put what happened in writing and bring to you within 24 hours.

Now, I failed to bring that letter within 24hours but on August 1, 2023, I brought a letter dated July 20, 2023.

When did you receive the letter?

On July 20 that the letter is dated which will exonerate of all disobedience?

Or on August 1 that the letter reached your desk which would mean that I disobeyed your directives by up to one week?

Hate is a very bad thing.after tinubu wins those,someone will bring another flimsy and ridiculous case and you will still latch on just to gain relevance and pour hate

Lotanna2:
Hate is a very bad thing.after tinubu wins those,someone will bring another flimsy and ridiculous case and you will still latch on just to gain relevance and pour hate

Lol!

You are degenerating to emotional tantrums rather than sticking to facts and the law.

Tinubu was an invalid candidate for 7 days. That’s the law.