seunmsg:
Excellent analysis. Nothing else to add. The judges won’t depart from the views you’ve expressed here.

swear if you read to the last. You are a Scavenger

garfield1:


Where did he get the original when tinubu has the original? According to the evidence act 2011,an expired document worthless.additionally,he is not the maker of the document so he is not competent to speak on it

Where did he get the original when tinubu has the original?

Do you have a passport? and have you ever had an expired passport?

if you have then you would have known how Atiku got the original expired passport, when you want to renew your expired passport you take it to the passport office and they keep the expired one and give you a new one, Tinubu was not with the expired passport and most likely has renewed it for it to be with the Guinean government.

Most people do not return their expired passport without the intention of renewing it, I have an expired passport with me, it expired last year, I have no intention of returning it till I renew it.

Atiku got the original copy and brought it to court( please read the tribunal proceeding) on the day of the presentation, which means most likely Tinubu is with the new copy of his Guinean passport.

please paste a copy of the evidence act here to prove your point....

garfield1:


I never said I am a lawyer.even if atiku proves that tinubu was a guinean citizen,he failed to prove that he voluntarily acquired it.in the end,he failed

Then Tinubu will have to prove that he was forced to take it..

voluntary

Done or undertaken of one's own free will.

Acting or done willingly and without constraint or expectation of reward.

Normally controlled by or subject to individual volition.

casualobserver:


Oga stop using English words you clearly do not understand the meaning. You have not debunked anything.


debunk
verb [ T ] informal
UK /ˌdiːˈbʌŋk/ US /ˌdiːˈbʌŋk/
Add to word list
to show that something is less important, less good, or less true than it has been made to appear:

debunk Add to list Share
/ˈdiˌbəŋk/
/diˈbəŋk/
IPA guide
Other forms: debunking; debunked; debunks
When you debunk something you show it to be false. Many magicians, including Houdini and Penn and Teller, have worked to debunk the idea that magic is anything other than a very clever illusion.

To debunk something is to prove it wrong.

Sorry sir. I have modified the same post.

garfield1:


I await the debunking but just like someone said here,you know obi has lost but choose to indulge in vain mischief

It's been modified. Check it again. 😂😂😂

garfield1:
Notwithstanding the headline,this is surely how the court will rule.this is based on what the petitioners tendered in court,their final written address and replies.just as the court combined or consolidated atiku and obi petitions,I will attempt to do so.the petition is hinged on five grounds namely;

1) That obi and atiku won the elections and that their votes were suppressed.

2) That there was massive violation of inec guidelines necessitating in irregularities which calls for outright cancellations and a rerun.

3) That tinubu should be disqualified based on a conviction or punishment by u.s court

4) That Shettima is guilty of double nomination

5) That 25% requirement in FCT is mandatory

6) That Tinubu is not qualified by being a citizen of guinea and he is also guilty of perjury and inconsistencies in his educational qualifications

Ground one: Peter obi has not proven that he won the election and has not brought any proof to that effect.all his evidences points to the fact that tinubu won and that there was irregularities.even the mathematician prof ofoedu's analysis showed the only difference in the overall results was in benue,rivers and 18,000 units that were blurred.no evidence points to peter winning.it is safe to say that obi has abandoned this prayer and wants fresh polls.
For atiku,most of his evidences points to irregularities.a watery report akin to the 2019 server debacle focusing on 26 states tendered by Sam oduntan showed he won but did not give details as to how and was based only on irev data.atiku is focusing on disqualifying tinubu and declaring himself winner or a rerun.infact,evidences presented by both petitioners shows that election was conducted peacefully and the only issue was just upload which is supposed to be manual or electronic as provided by section 60-65 EA.

Ground 2:It is settled law that one will not only prove irregularities but do so substantially and show how it affected the overall results.Lp lawyers claim Inec promised electronic transmission but has failed to prove that inec failed to transmit electronically.the only called one witness to that effect who claimed that elections was free and fair.Atiku called five adhoc staffs who also testified to that effect.this unfortunately only affects the polling units they worked as evidence in election cases are restricted to each units.inec can easily call 10 staffs who will testify that results were sucessfully transmitted.in any case,the electoral act plus a fhc judgment gives inec the leeway to transmit anyhow.The court of appeal recently ruled that by virtue of section 60 of the EA,inec can choose,vary,change it's manner of transmission at any point.In other words,both manual and electronic transmission are allowed.those witnesses that said they couldn't transmit didn't blame inec but the bvas and eventually sent the results to the collation units.the purpose of electronic transmission by virtue of section 60-65 of the EA2022 is to aid collation.no collation officer was called to testify.again,the law says the collation officer will compare the hardcopy with the transmitted results.the transmitted result that was uploaded is still on the bvas in image form so the collation staff can easily look at the bvas image and form ec8a.The EA clearly specified transmit or transfer.transfer mainly has to do with manual activities while transmit is electronic.further reading of the manual guidelines will expose more on this.

Lp also called an amazon staff to show that there was no glitch.apart from the fact that she is partisan and on her own frolic without AWS permit,she confirmed that they could be localized glitch within inec. she had no letter of employment or ID but presented a letter of work history which was downloaded a day earlier plus it was unsigned rendering it inadmissible.even if there was a glitch,it does not prove anything.the adeleke vs oyetola supra 2022 case placed reliance on physical evidence and tagged online evidences as thirdhand and unreliable.inec director provided incontrovertible evidence showing localized glitches and network issues
The only quarter concrete evidence of irregularities obi provided was from 18000 units of blurred results which was based only on irev which are secondary results.lp lawyers should have verified with primary hardcopies.if they could be a leeway, it will be from here as 9 mil voters are domiciled here and 2.5 mil voters came out during the last polls.in another rerun,fewer will come out.outside this,no substantial infraction has been proven.nothing compelling has been tendered.see okereke vs umahi 2015 supra.obi petition is full of mere allegations and averments and these are not evidence.see uzodinma vs pdp supra 2020.most of the evidences tendered were not pleaded.see the above case laws.Lp failed to provide inec top copies and a comparison with top copies from rivers showed that the irev was unreliable.in adeleke vs oyetola,jsc Agim clearly stated that the bvas and server materials could be affected by network issues,printer error,scanning issue,bad camera etc which further proves it's unreliability
To further destroy obi's case,the apex court has severally stated that guidelines cannot be a ground for election petition.see wike vs dakuku, okereke vs supra,pdp vs yari...

Ground three: No arguments has been canvassed on the fct matter so it can be seemed abandoned.but if not,a community reading of section 28,section 42 and 299 of the constitution has placed fct as a state.the body language,orbiter dictum,innuendoes of the court has shown where they will stand.again,the principle of legal ambiguity presupposes that where an ambiguity in law exists,the jurists will choose the most sensible, meaningful option for the lawmakers are not confusionists or intend to create chaos.Again,all the laws quoted by the Lp lawyers support this position.
In reality,fct is less than a state and cannot all of a sudden be elevated above a state without bringing equality first.moreover,other similar democracies do not practice such absurd voting system...section 134 of the constitution provided 2 requirements.if it intended to make Fct mandatory,a third requirement would have been separately provided below as no 3.
Again, section 22-28 states that all persons have equal voting rights likewise all voting areas.no place is superior to another.this supercedes whatever 134 may be implying because an earlier provision of the constitution supercedes a later one.section 299 sees fct as a state.the courts have severally stated that the fct is neither superior or inferior to a state.


Ground three: section 182 d and e clearly says within a period of 10 years,he has been imprisoned or convicted by any court in nigeria.tinubu forfeiture wasn't a conviction and even if,10 years has elapsed and the judgment wasn't registered in Nigeria.that subsection further states that he must be under imprisonment or a sentence flowing or arising from a conviction and tinubu is not under any conviction.civil cases do not lead to convictions.moreover,he was never charged,arraigned or found guilty of any thing.what happened was that three of his accounts were frozen via an exparte order by us authorities with links to two convicts.he now proved to the court and fbi that money in two accounts were his and the one belonging to the other remaining account wasn't his.so,in a mutual agreement supervised by the court,two accounts were unfrozen and one forfeited as part of a compromise or out of court settlement.
The Lp quoted Austin vs USA to support their case but this case was a criminal case where there was a trial and conviction.in Tims vs Indiana,the accused pleaded guilty in court and was convicted.therefore,this is inapplicable here as section 68 of the evidence act States that a foreign law will be subjected to a municipal court.the reciprocal agreement has made it mandatory for all foreign judgments to be registered.this prayer is dead.let me kill it further by stating that Obi failed to call a lawyer vested in American law.barr nwakaeti only visited america once and provided scant knowledge of the US system.he also failed to call witnesses from the us judicial or prosecuting authorities.current evidences like the 2003 letter from us embassy and his recent visits to the USA shows he has no issues there.

Ground four; the shettima issue has been buried by the supreme court.they clearly stated that it was a pre election matter and internal to a party and that it can only extend beyond if he was nominated by 2 parties.section 84 of the electoral act clearly makes nomination a pre election matter and only aspirants have locus standi.double nomination is not a constitutional matter and only constitutional matters pertaining to qualifications can be raised at a tribunal.again,the apex court found out that shettima was never guilty of double nomination and lp has no new evidence necessitating a review.

6) concerning perjury,the inec form has two questions on nationality.whether one has ever changed nationality? This is a No for tinubu.secondly,whether tinubu has ever voluntarily acquired citizenship elsewhere.this is a no because he never sought for guinean citizenship,he was only conferred and given a diplomatic passport to that effect.
On the so-called evidences supplied by atiku witness,the witness a lawyer rubbished most of them in what we call hostile testimony. Again,it is settled law that an expired document in law is inadmissible Atiku failed to call a witness from Guinea or someone vested in guinean law to testify .
The Female gender was recorded in his transcript and he never submitted transcript to inec as it's not a constitutional requirement. Again,the documents was gotten from a lawyer Mr kowtals who has no links with the schools tinubu attended.he should have called witnesses from the issuing documents as only the maker can competently prove it's authenticity.pdp and lp quoted degi vs diri to support their case but the court recently in edevbie vs sheriff stated that they have departed from that judgment.in oyetola vs adeleke,they stated that when a dispute about a document arises,the testimony of the issuing authority will settle the tie.Adekunle has been in his name and the apex court has severally ruled on name variations.Atiku failed to prove that it is not part of his name.the age differences is of no effect as the apex court noted that as far as a candidate is up to 40 years,he is good to go.see AGI vs ayade supra..

This matter will be dismissed with 1 billion naira fine to be paid by the petitioners each to each of the respondents.cooouurrrt.


Mynd44
Nplfmod
Seun
Mukina2
Penguin2
Fergie001
Obinoscopy
Casualobserver
Coolambience
Helinues
Yarimo
Quotasystem
Svoboda
Oghenaogie
Efewestern
Aiel123
Afamed
Mrvitalis
Spy360
Esseite
Silvertongue
Asobo
Donphilopus
Generalpula
Muykem
Alphagan
Iamgrey
Raumdeuter
Ejimatic
Zoedew
Litigator

You have done well , good analysis

Brendaniel:




Then Tinubu will have to prove that he was forced to take it..

voluntary

Done or undertaken of one's own free will.

Acting or done willingly and without constraint or expectation of reward.

Normally controlled by or subject to individual volition.

Tinubu will not prove anything.the burden is on atiku to prove that tinubu voluntarily acquired citizenship and also swore allegiance to guinea

Brendaniel:



Where did he get the original when tinubu has the original?

Do you have a passport? and have you ever had an expired passport?

if you have then you would have known how Atiku got the original expired passport, when you want to renew your expired passport you take it to the passport office and they keep the expired one and give you a new one, Tinubu was not with the expired passport and most likely has renewed it for it to be with the Guinean government.

Most people do not return their expired passport without the intention of renewing it, I have an expired passport with me, it expired last year, I have no intention of returning it till I renew it.

Atiku got the original copy and brought it to court( please read the tribunal proceeding) on the day of the presentation, which means most likely Tinubu is with the new copy of his Guinean passport.

please paste a copy of the evidence act here to prove your point....

Oga,atiku lawyer himself stated that they downloaded it online.did he prove that tinubu renew it?

richidinho:
Ok

Bro, the picture in this comment sounds funny but believe me I still don't understand it. Please explain

Spy360:
The grandeur of disillusion. You have been feeding your head wrong information. I should have ignored but for the sake of innocent readers, once again I will debunk ALL.

This is simply irrational.



The CTCs of hardcopies of results INEC gave Peter Obi which were admitted in court showed that there were no results for 8,000 Polling Units (facts). The IREV copies which were supposed to verify the hardcopies showed 18088 blurred and unreadable results of polling units. All these were supplied by INEC. This amounts to over 2.5m votes. Substantial to cancel the elections altogether. However LP on their own submitted 10,000 results from the agents which showed they won all of those PU. The INEC supplied IREV and hardcopies also showed that LP won both Rivers and Benue states. So PO won more states than Tinubu and FCT and also majority of the votes. The result of this showed that if the court considers the elections compliant then they will have to rely on the alternative 10,000 agent copies of results from LP. INEC brought no alternative hard copies mind you. They couldn't have because they don't have them. So your claim that LP didn't bring evidence is a mad man's dream.


Even the respondents SANs didn't bring this foolish argument. What the FHC said was simply that INEC will choose how they will collate results. The EA gave INEC the power to decide how to collate results. The question you should be asking is what method did INEC choose? Your answer is in the INEC guidelines for election. It was the same guidelines that their staff were trained upon. By law any staff that didn't follow the guidelines can be prosecuted and jailed for minimum of 6months. What is in the guideline? Realtime upload of results to IREV and that IREV should be used as secondary data to verify hardcopies in case of disputes. Now that there is disputes IREV failed and you think there is substantial compliance? All parties agreed that the IREV data should not be different from the hardcopy. But evidence show that they are different. Fact is INEC did not follow what they prescribed. The Oyetola and Adeleke case is a clear precedent on this where the SC declared that the hardcopy and IREV are mandatory election matters. What is post election is the Record of Election Results Archive which is clearly different from IREV.


First of all, the FCT does not need any argument. It is the prerogative of the court to interpret the constitution. And a literal interpretation simply shows that FCT is mandatory. There is no going back on this. Even Olanipekun has accepted it. I don't know why you are still being ignorant. Or are you not following the trends?



The petitioners case is based on Section 134:1(d). That law did not bother itself on whether there is a conviction or not. It only stated that the person should be disqualified if they are ever fined for acts involving dishonesty. Forfeiture is a fine, and narcotics and money laundering are acts of dishonesty injurious to mankind. One thing that all parties agree to including you is that Tinubu is a drug criminal who ran away from US to avoid being jailed. The forfeiture was done as a punishment for his crimes.


Stop deceiving yourself. A matter is pre-election if election have not held. Before election only a party member can challenge. After election it becomes a post election matter where fellow contestants can challenge. Your illusion with locus standi is your undoing. Shettima was nominated as VP on 14th June the same day his name was submitted to INEC. APC submitted his withdrawal from senate race the following day on 15th June. The documents are all there. All these information came from INEC. So no capping.

You should be more scared of the APM petition. That one is express disqualification based on invalid nomination. The VP placeholder Masari withdrew on the 24th of May (undisputed by all parties), Shettima was nominated on the 14th of June (undisputed by all parties). That leaves a period of more than 14days that invalidates the presidential ticket of Tinubu. This one is straight knockout. No going back.


Once again you are drunk on your own lies. Tinubu's EC9 form showed that he claimed not to have any other citizenship. He has also not denied having Guinean citizenship. His defence was that citizenship ends when the passports expires. That lame and foolish submission by his lawyer is the worst statement ever made in court by a SAN.

As per his school certificates, what he presented to INEC were fake documents download from Pinterest. The school Chicago State University under subpoena sent the original documents which were certified as true copies. Your foolish SAN and you are arguing that no witness from the school came to testify. Are you guys on colos? A organisation that sent their CTC does not need to appear in person when the documents already speak for themselves.



This last one is just the hallmark of the clownishness all agbado people enjoy.

If the judiciary fail to disqualify Tinubu, then just know that justice will never be achieved in this country. Never. And no body will ever again approach the courts for Electoral petition. What this mean is that the country will sink into anarchy and violent settlement of election disputes. Tinubu ticks all the boxes for someone who should never be president of Nigeria.

Mynd44
Nplfmod
Seun
Mukina2
Penguin2
Fergie001
Obinoscopy
Casualobserver
Coolambience
Helinues
Yarimo
Quotasystem
Svoboda
Oghenaogie
Efewestern
Aiel123
Afamed
Mrvitalis
Spy360
Esseite
Silvertongue
Asobo
Donphilopus
Generalpula
Muykem
Alphagan
Iamgrey
Raumdeuter
Ejimatic
Zoedew
Litigator

Thanks for the insults,you deserve a ban and you will surely get it.next time,learn to argue maturely without abuses boy.

Spy360:
The grandeur of disillusion. You have been feeding your head wrong information. I should have ignored but for the sake of innocent readers, once again I will debunk ALL.

This is simply irrational.



The CTCs of hardcopies of results INEC gave Peter Obi which were admitted in court showed that there were no results for 8,000 Polling Units (facts). The IREV copies which were supposed to verify the hardcopies showed 18088 blurred and unreadable results of polling units. All these were supplied by INEC. This amounts to over 2.5m votes. Substantial to cancel the elections altogether. However LP on their own submitted 10,000 results from the agents which showed they won all of those PU. The INEC supplied IREV and hardcopies also showed that LP won both Rivers and Benue states. So PO won more states than Tinubu and FCT and also majority of the votes. The result of this showed that if the court considers the elections compliant then they will have to rely on the alternative 10,000 agent copies of results from LP. INEC brought no alternative hard copies mind you. They couldn't have because they don't have them. So your claim that LP didn't bring evidence is a mad man's dream.


Even the respondents SANs didn't bring this foolish argument. What the FHC said was simply that INEC will choose how they will collate results. The EA gave INEC the power to decide how to collate results. The question you should be asking is what method did INEC choose? Your answer is in the INEC guidelines for election. It was the same guidelines that their staff were trained upon. By law any staff that didn't follow the guidelines can be prosecuted and jailed for minimum of 6months. What is in the guideline? Realtime upload of results to IREV and that IREV should be used as secondary data to verify hardcopies in case of disputes. Now that there is disputes IREV failed and you think there is substantial compliance? All parties agreed that the IREV data should not be different from the hardcopy. But evidence show that they are different. Fact is INEC did not follow what they prescribed. The Oyetola and Adeleke case is a clear precedent on this where the SC declared that the hardcopy and IREV are mandatory election matters. What is post election is the Record of Election Results Archive which is clearly different from IREV.


First of all, the FCT does not need any argument. It is the prerogative of the court to interpret the constitution. And a literal interpretation simply shows that FCT is mandatory. There is no going back on this. Even Olanipekun has accepted it. I don't know why you are still being ignorant. Or are you not following the trends?



The petitioners case is based on Section 134:1(d). That law did not bother itself on whether there is a conviction or not. It only stated that the person should be disqualified if they are ever fined for acts involving dishonesty. Forfeiture is a fine, and narcotics and money laundering are acts of dishonesty injurious to mankind. One thing that all parties agree to including you is that Tinubu is a drug criminal who ran away from US to avoid being jailed. The forfeiture was done as a punishment for his crimes.


Stop deceiving yourself. A matter is pre-election if election have not held. Before election only a party member can challenge. After election it becomes a post election matter where fellow contestants can challenge. Your illusion with locus standi is your undoing. Shettima was nominated as VP on 14th June the same day his name was submitted to INEC. APC submitted his withdrawal from senate race the following day on 15th June. The documents are all there. All these information came from INEC. So no capping.

You should be more scared of the APM petition. That one is express disqualification based on invalid nomination. The VP placeholder Masari withdrew on the 24th of May (undisputed by all parties), Shettima was nominated on the 14th of June (undisputed by all parties). That leaves a period of more than 14days that invalidates the presidential ticket of Tinubu. This one is straight knockout. No going back.


Once again you are drunk on your own lies. Tinubu's EC9 form showed that he claimed not to have any other citizenship. He has also not denied having Guinean citizenship. His defence was that citizenship ends when the passports expires. That lame and foolish submission by his lawyer is the worst statement ever made in court by a SAN.

As per his school certificates, what he presented to INEC were fake documents download from Pinterest. The school Chicago State University under subpoena sent the original documents which were certified as true copies. Your foolish SAN and you are arguing that no witness from the school came to testify. Are you guys on colos? A organisation that sent their CTC does not need to appear in person when the documents already speak for themselves.



This last one is just the hallmark of the clownishness all agbado people enjoy.

If the judiciary fail to disqualify Tinubu, then just know that justice will never be achieved in this country. Never. And no body will ever again approach the courts for Electoral petition. What this mean is that the country will sink into anarchy and violent settlement of election disputes. Tinubu ticks all the boxes for someone who should never be president of Nigeria.

Mynd44
Nplfmod
Seun
Mukina2
Penguin2
Fergie001
Obinoscopy
Casualobserver
Coolambience
Helinues
Yarimo
Quotasystem
Svoboda
Oghenaogie
Efewestern
Aiel123
Afamed
Mrvitalis
Spy360
Esseite
Silvertongue
Asobo
Donphilopus
Generalpula
Muykem
Alphagan
Iamgrey
Raumdeuter
Ejimatic
Zoedew
Litigator

Mynd44 nplfmod SEUN obinoscopy lalasticlala rule 2 and 3 violated.he abused and threatened me.apply maximum punishment

garfield1:


I never said I am a lawyer.even if atiku proves that tinubu was a guinean citizen,he failed to prove that he voluntarily acquired it.in the end,he failed

You're not a lawyer and you're running your mouth like tap.

You can continue feeding your mob with lies.

As for me, I know your kind and I know you are a hack.

garfield1:


Mynd44 nplfmod SEUN obinoscopy lalasticlala rule 2 and 3 violated.he abused and threatened me.apply maximum punishment

😂😂😂

Is this a joke or what. You saw superior argument and your response is to have me banned instead of thanking me for curing your ignorant head.

Funny enough I did not even insult or threaten you. Piss off.

garfield1:


Mynd44 nplfmod SEUN obinoscopy lalasticlala rule 2 and 3 violated.he abused and threatened me.apply maximum punishment

Lmao


Because he bursted your lies.

You met your match in him and you're calling Nairaland security agents to apprehend Spyro?

Be a man for once Garfield1. Stop being a weak critic that can't withstand a pushback.

Spy360:

😂😂😂

Is this a joke or what. You saw superior argument and your response is to have me banned instead of thanking me for curing your ignorant head.

Funny enough I did not even insult or threaten you. Piss off.

.

Don't mind the little boy.

You served him hot Pepper soup and he can't even swallow the water anymore.

He's a very stewpïd boy

Many know my position on this subject matter.

garfield1:


No,the court will simply use fct and a case study and determine if tinubu got 25% of two third of fct.they can also use Kano or Lagos

Which type of lying mathematics is this formula? The law is saying 25% of votes cast in the FCT! What brought about 25% of 2/3 of votes cast in FCT? This kain thievery and manipulation beats common sense

garfield1:


I have tackled all these issues issues,if you took time to read,you won't utter this nonsense.
Inec did not hurry,they declared a winner three days after elections as they have been doing since 1999.tinubu met the constitutional requirements as he got 25% in the federation.
The supreme court has killed the double nomination matter.
What he forfeited wasn't his money plus it is not a conviction.
Atiku failed to prove that he has dual citizenship.the case is dead

what he forfeited isnt his money, then who's money is it....you are too old to be this myopic i swear

Kingsmeal:


Lmao


Because he bursted your lies.

You met your match in him and you're calling Nairaland security agents to apprehend Spyro?

Be a man for once Garfield1. Stop being a weak critic that can't withstand a pushback.

So I should respond with insults and get banned? Better he gets banned alone,I have passed that level. The painful thing is that obi will win and you guys won't learn

Spy360:

😂😂😂

Is this a joke or what. You saw superior argument and your response is to have me banned instead of thanking me for curing your ignorant head.

Funny enough I did not even insult or threaten you. Piss off.

Swerve,a heavy ban is coming kid..

Obi will fail woefully, pandora

Kingsmeal:


You're not a lawyer and you're running your mouth like tap.

You can continue feeding your mob with lies.

As for me, I know your kind and I know you are a hack.

And when obi loses according to my prediction,will you do?

Kingsmeal:
.

Don't mind the little boy.

You served him hot Pepper soup and he can't even swallow the water anymore.

He's a very stewpïd boy

Your referring to your nnam

ezechi242:


what he forfeited isnt his money, then who's money is it....you are too old to be this myopic i swear

The money belongs to agbele dumbidient

garfield1:


Oga,atiku lawyer himself stated that they downloaded it online.did he prove that tinubu renew it?

Link or article that proves that they downloaded it online.....

Brendaniel:


He didn't download it from the internet, he brought the original copy, please go and verify, even if the document is expired, it is still valid as evidence, it is like saying my expired university ID which has my matric number as evidence in a court cannot be tendered as proof that I went to that particular school.

If expired documents are not admissible in court then why do police officers use both expired and valid documents to investigate people.

leave that fool, they just gave them 1.5gig in their watsapp, dont you see how stupid he is?

garfield1:


Tinubu will not prove anything.the burden is on atiku to prove that tinubu voluntarily acquired citizenship and also swore allegiance to guinea

So why was Olanipekun trying to prove that an expired passport means expired citizenship if Atiku has not proved beyond reasonable doubt that his evidence passed all checks to the court, he wouldn't have made such an argument if he felt the document didn't prove beyond reasonable doubts to the court

It is now left for Tinubu to prove to the court that he wasn't forced...

garfield1:


The money belongs to agbele dumbidient

chai....i pity the law firm you work for......even charge and bail sef i no sure say you fit do am .....you should ask your watsapp coordinator what to say

Kingsmeal:
.

Don't mind the little boy.

You served him hot Pepper soup and he can't even swallow the water anymore.

He's a very stewpïd boy

You're even more dumb than the other guy cause he even attempted to raise a foolish point but u just dived in to spew trash like a frustrated animal with zero hope like humans


As for the analysis, All the sane people in Nigeria knows how this will pan out and if u disagree with Garfield1's stance, You're worst than a 40yo man who still believes in Santa Claux

Spy360:
The grandeur of disillusion. You have been feeding your head wrong information. I should have ignored but for the sake of innocent readers, once again I will debunk ALL.

This is simply irrational.



The CTCs of hardcopies of results INEC gave Peter Obi which were admitted in court showed that there were no results for 8,000 Polling Units (facts). The IREV copies which were supposed to verify the hardcopies showed 18088 blurred and unreadable results of polling units. All these were supplied by INEC. This amounts to over 2.5m votes. Substantial to cancel the elections altogether. However LP on their own submitted 10,000 results from the agents which showed they won all of those PU. The INEC supplied IREV and hardcopies also showed that LP won both Rivers and Benue states. So PO won more states than Tinubu and FCT and also majority of the votes. The result of this showed that if the court considers the elections compliant then they will have to rely on the alternative 10,000 agent copies of results from LP. INEC brought no alternative hard copies mind you. They couldn't have because they don't have them. So your claim that LP didn't bring evidence is a mad man's dream.


Even the respondents SANs didn't bring this foolish argument. What the FHC said was simply that INEC will choose how they will collate results. The EA gave INEC the power to decide how to collate results. The question you should be asking is what method did INEC choose? Your answer is in the INEC guidelines for election. It was the same guidelines that their staff were trained upon. By law any staff that didn't follow the guidelines can be prosecuted and jailed for minimum of 6months. What is in the guideline? Realtime upload of results to IREV and that IREV should be used as secondary data to verify hardcopies in case of disputes. Now that there is disputes IREV failed and you think there is substantial compliance? All parties agreed that the IREV data should not be different from the hardcopy. But evidence show that they are different. Fact is INEC did not follow what they prescribed. The Oyetola and Adeleke case is a clear precedent on this where the SC declared that the hardcopy and IREV are mandatory election matters. What is post election is the Record of Election Results Archive which is clearly different from IREV.


First of all, the FCT does not need any argument. It is the prerogative of the court to interpret the constitution. And a literal interpretation simply shows that FCT is mandatory. There is no going back on this. Even Olanipekun has accepted it. I don't know why you are still being ignorant. Or are you not following the trends?



The petitioners case is based on Section 134:1(d). That law did not bother itself on whether there is a conviction or not. It only stated that the person should be disqualified if they are ever fined for acts involving dishonesty. Forfeiture is a fine, and narcotics and money laundering are acts of dishonesty injurious to mankind. One thing that all parties agree to including you is that Tinubu is a drug criminal who ran away from US to avoid being jailed. The forfeiture was done as a punishment for his crimes.


Stop deceiving yourself. A matter is pre-election if election have not held. Before election only a party member can challenge. After election it becomes a post election matter where fellow contestants can challenge. Your illusion with locus standi is your undoing. Shettima was nominated as VP on 14th June the same day his name was submitted to INEC. APC submitted his withdrawal from senate race the following day on 15th June. The documents are all there. All these information came from INEC. So no capping.

You should be more scared of the APM petition. That one is express disqualification based on invalid nomination. The VP placeholder Masari withdrew on the 24th of May (undisputed by all parties), Shettima was nominated on the 14th of June (undisputed by all parties). That leaves a period of more than 14days that invalidates the presidential ticket of Tinubu. This one is straight knockout. No going back.


Once again you are drunk on your own lies. Tinubu's EC9 form showed that he claimed not to have any other citizenship. He has also not denied having Guinean citizenship. His defence was that citizenship ends when the passports expires. That lame and foolish submission by his lawyer is the worst statement ever made in court by a SAN.

As per his school certificates, what he presented to INEC were fake documents download from Pinterest. The school Chicago State University under subpoena sent the original documents which were certified as true copies. Your foolish SAN and you are arguing that no witness from the school came to testify. Are you guys on colos? A organisation that sent their CTC does not need to appear in person when the documents already speak for themselves.



This last one is just the hallmark of the clownishness all agbado people enjoy.

If the judiciary fail to disqualify Tinubu, then just know that justice will never be achieved in this country. Never. And no body will ever again approach the courts for Electoral petition. What this mean is that the country will sink into anarchy and violent settlement of election disputes. Tinubu ticks all the boxes for someone who should never be president of Nigeria.

Mynd44
Nplfmod
Seun
Mukina2
Penguin2
Fergie001
Obinoscopy
Casualobserver
Coolambience
Helinues
Yarimo
Quotasystem
Svoboda
Oghenaogie
Efewestern
Aiel123
Afamed
Mrvitalis
Spy360
Esseite
Silvertongue
Asobo
Donphilopus
Generalpula
Muykem
Alphagan
Iamgrey
Raumdeuter
Ejimatic
Zoedew
Litigator

Bros, God bless you for this detailed Analysis.

Don't mind the garfiled or foolfield or whatever his name is. Always dishing out outrageous and nonsensical analysis. Thanks once again

garfield1:
Notwithstanding the headline,this is surely how the court will rule.this is based on what the petitioners tendered in court,their final written address and replies.just as the court combined or consolidated atiku and obi petitions,I will attempt to do so.the petition is hinged on five grounds namely;

1) That obi and atiku won the elections and that their votes were suppressed.

2) That there was massive violation of inec guidelines necessitating in irregularities which calls for outright cancellations and a rerun.

3) That tinubu should be disqualified based on a conviction or punishment by u.s court

4) That Shettima is guilty of double nomination

5) That 25% requirement in FCT is mandatory

6) That Tinubu is not qualified by being a citizen of guinea and he is also guilty of perjury and inconsistencies in his educational qualifications

Ground one: Peter obi has not proven that he won the election and has not brought any proof to that effect.all his evidences points to the fact that tinubu won and that there was irregularities.even the mathematician prof ofoedu's analysis showed the only difference in the overall results was in benue,rivers and 18,000 units that were blurred.no evidence points to peter winning.it is safe to say that obi has abandoned this prayer and wants fresh polls.
For atiku,most of his evidences points to irregularities.a watery report akin to the 2019 server debacle focusing on 26 states tendered by Sam oduntan showed he won but did not give details as to how and was based only on irev data.atiku is focusing on disqualifying tinubu and declaring himself winner or a rerun.infact,evidences presented by both petitioners shows that election was conducted peacefully and the only issue was just upload which is supposed to be manual or electronic as provided by section 60-65 EA.

Ground 2:It is settled law that one will not only prove irregularities but do so substantially and show how it affected the overall results.Lp lawyers claim Inec promised electronic transmission but has failed to prove that inec failed to transmit electronically.the only called one witness to that effect who claimed that elections was free and fair.Atiku called five adhoc staffs who also testified to that effect.this unfortunately only affects the polling units they worked as evidence in election cases are restricted to each units.inec can easily call 10 staffs who will testify that results were sucessfully transmitted.in any case,the electoral act plus a fhc judgment gives inec the leeway to transmit anyhow.The court of appeal recently ruled that by virtue of section 60 of the EA,inec can choose,vary,change it's manner of transmission at any point.In other words,both manual and electronic transmission are allowed.those witnesses that said they couldn't transmit didn't blame inec but the bvas and eventually sent the results to the collation units.the purpose of electronic transmission by virtue of section 60-65 of the EA2022 is to aid collation.no collation officer was called to testify.again,the law says the collation officer will compare the hardcopy with the transmitted results.the transmitted result that was uploaded is still on the bvas in image form so the collation staff can easily look at the bvas image and form ec8a.The EA clearly specified transmit or transfer.transfer mainly has to do with manual activities while transmit is electronic.further reading of the manual guidelines will expose more on this.

Lp also called an amazon staff to show that there was no glitch.apart from the fact that she is partisan and on her own frolic without AWS permit,she confirmed that they could be localized glitch within inec. she had no letter of employment or ID but presented a letter of work history which was downloaded a day earlier plus it was unsigned rendering it inadmissible.even if there was a glitch,it does not prove anything.the adeleke vs oyetola supra 2022 case placed reliance on physical evidence and tagged online evidences as thirdhand and unreliable.inec director provided incontrovertible evidence showing localized glitches and network issues
The only quarter concrete evidence of irregularities obi provided was from 18000 units of blurred results which was based only on irev which are secondary results.lp lawyers should have verified with primary hardcopies.if they could be a leeway, it will be from here as 9 mil voters are domiciled here and 2.5 mil voters came out during the last polls.in another rerun,fewer will come out.outside this,no substantial infraction has been proven.nothing compelling has been tendered.see okereke vs umahi 2015 supra.obi petition is full of mere allegations and averments and these are not evidence.see uzodinma vs pdp supra 2020.most of the evidences tendered were not pleaded.see the above case laws.Lp failed to provide inec top copies and a comparison with top copies from rivers showed that the irev was unreliable.in adeleke vs oyetola,jsc Agim clearly stated that the bvas and server materials could be affected by network issues,printer error,scanning issue,bad camera etc which further proves it's unreliability
To further destroy obi's case,the apex court has severally stated that guidelines cannot be a ground for election petition.see wike vs dakuku, okereke vs supra,pdp vs yari...

Ground three: No arguments has been canvassed on the fct matter so it can be seemed abandoned.but if not,a community reading of section 28,section 42 and 299 of the constitution has placed fct as a state.the body language,orbiter dictum,innuendoes of the court has shown where they will stand.again,the principle of legal ambiguity presupposes that where an ambiguity in law exists,the jurists will choose the most sensible, meaningful option for the lawmakers are not confusionists or intend to create chaos.Again,all the laws quoted by the Lp lawyers support this position.
In reality,fct is less than a state and cannot all of a sudden be elevated above a state without bringing equality first.moreover,other similar democracies do not practice such absurd voting system...section 134 of the constitution provided 2 requirements.if it intended to make Fct mandatory,a third requirement would have been separately provided below as no 3.
Again, section 22-28 states that all persons have equal voting rights likewise all voting areas.no place is superior to another.this supercedes whatever 134 may be implying because an earlier provision of the constitution supercedes a later one.section 299 sees fct as a state.the courts have severally stated that the fct is neither superior or inferior to a state.


Ground three: section 182 d and e clearly says within a period of 10 years,he has been imprisoned or convicted by any court in nigeria.tinubu forfeiture wasn't a conviction and even if,10 years has elapsed and the judgment wasn't registered in Nigeria.that subsection further states that he must be under imprisonment or a sentence flowing or arising from a conviction and tinubu is not under any conviction.civil cases do not lead to convictions.moreover,he was never charged,arraigned or found guilty of any thing.what happened was that three of his accounts were frozen via an exparte order by us authorities with links to two convicts.he now proved to the court and fbi that money in two accounts were his and the one belonging to the other remaining account wasn't his.so,in a mutual agreement supervised by the court,two accounts were unfrozen and one forfeited as part of a compromise or out of court settlement.
The Lp quoted Austin vs USA to support their case but this case was a criminal case where there was a trial and conviction.in Tims vs Indiana,the accused pleaded guilty in court and was convicted.therefore,this is inapplicable here as section 68 of the evidence act States that a foreign law will be subjected to a municipal court.the reciprocal agreement has made it mandatory for all foreign judgments to be registered.this prayer is dead.let me kill it further by stating that Obi failed to call a lawyer vested in American law.barr nwakaeti only visited america once and provided scant knowledge of the US system.he also failed to call witnesses from the us judicial or prosecuting authorities.current evidences like the 2003 letter from us embassy and his recent visits to the USA shows he has no issues there.

Ground four; the shettima issue has been buried by the supreme court.they clearly stated that it was a pre election matter and internal to a party and that it can only extend beyond if he was nominated by 2 parties.section 84 of the electoral act clearly makes nomination a pre election matter and only aspirants have locus standi.double nomination is not a constitutional matter and only constitutional matters pertaining to qualifications can be raised at a tribunal.again,the apex court found out that shettima was never guilty of double nomination and lp has no new evidence necessitating a review.

6) concerning perjury,the inec form has two questions on nationality.whether one has ever changed nationality? This is a No for tinubu.secondly,whether tinubu has ever voluntarily acquired citizenship elsewhere.this is a no because he never sought for guinean citizenship,he was only conferred and given a diplomatic passport to that effect.
On the so-called evidences supplied by atiku witness,the witness a lawyer rubbished most of them in what we call hostile testimony. Again,it is settled law that an expired document in law is inadmissible Atiku failed to call a witness from Guinea or someone vested in guinean law to testify .
The Female gender was recorded in his transcript and he never submitted transcript to inec as it's not a constitutional requirement. Again,the documents was gotten from a lawyer Mr kowtals who has no links with the schools tinubu attended.he should have called witnesses from the issuing documents as only the maker can competently prove it's authenticity.pdp and lp quoted degi vs diri to support their case but the court recently in edevbie vs sheriff stated that they have departed from that judgment.in oyetola vs adeleke,they stated that when a dispute about a document arises,the testimony of the issuing authority will settle the tie.Adekunle has been in his name and the apex court has severally ruled on name variations.Atiku failed to prove that it is not part of his name.the age differences is of no effect as the apex court noted that as far as a candidate is up to 40 years,he is good to go.see AGI vs ayade supra..

This matter will be dismissed with 1 billion naira fine to be paid by the petitioners each to each of the respondents.cooouurrrt.


Mynd44
Nplfmod
Seun
Mukina2
Penguin2
Fergie001
Obinoscopy
Casualobserver
Coolambience
Helinues
Yarimo
Quotasystem
Svoboda
Oghenaogie
Efewestern
Aiel123
Afamed
Mrvitalis
Spy360
Esseite
Silvertongue
Asobo
Donphilopus
Generalpula
Muykem
Alphagan
Iamgrey
Raumdeuter
Ejimatic
Zoedew
Litigator

I want ask you a question concerning the shittema pre election wahala.

I saw you commit murder, I have evidence that you committed it, so are you now telling me the court won't accept my evidence because am not a relative of the person been murdered?

Something is truly wrong with you Agbado people, you people are devoid of reasoning.

The supreme court said it doesn't have the jurisdiction to entertain the case, that's why they struck it out.
There's pre elections and post elections matters.

Don't you think obi knew all these?. Why didn't he bring it up as a pre election matter? Simple, he can't, why?, because the event for the grounds of disqualification hasn't occurred. It's common sense, which from your analysis, you surely lack. I thank God alot of us on here are educated, if not! We for don dey say another thing!

garfield1:


Plot how? Did obi prove anything

I know what I said
You are a staunch APC member,so it's normal if you are one sided in your opinion.
My own be say try this make sure that you chop from this APC system cause naija ain't funny again oooooo

Omowale2023:


I want ask you a question concerning the shittema pre election wahala.

I saw you commit murder, I have evidence that you committed it, so are you now telling me the court won't accept my evidence because am not a relative of the person been murdered?

Something is truly wrong with you Agbado people, you people are devoid of reasoning.

The supreme court said it doesn't have the jurisdiction to entertain the case, that's why they struck it out.
There's pre elections and post elections matters.

Don't you think obi knew all these?. Why didn't he bring it up as a pre election matter? Simple, he can't, why?, because the event for the grounds of disqualification hasn't occurred. It's common sense, which from your analysis, you surely lack. I thank God alot of us on here are educated, if not! We for don dey say another thing!

The supreme court additionally said shettima was not guilty of double nomination.the matter died there.obi and his fabs lacks commonsense hence raising it again