₦airaland Forum

ZIAZI:
No sire, save for resignation proper, there are other peculiar ways. I therefore refer you to Chapter 2, Part 1, Paragraph 15 of the PDP Constitution.

Judging from what you said, did Amaewhule intimate, inform, or notify the PDP?

Peace be unto you.

Good!! Thus, if I go to court and swear an affidavit that I'm no longer a member of a party or association or if I declare before before a notary public and have it published, can I still be said to be a member of that association?
Secondly, I find it disturbing that you're quoting APC and PDP constitutions in a purely constitutional matter. Are you saying parry constitution can be used to interpret the constitution? Is it valid to use party laws to determine what is implied by the constitution?

phantom:
What was the conclusion of the okorowo suit. Because they applied for an interlocutory injunction. Did he grant it?

Go and ask Henry Ekine or Falana.😂😂
You no sabi but you 1 put mouth for wetin you no know.🤡

phantom:
This man you are arguing with is not even aware that the PDP filed an application declaring their seats vacant in addition to their sworn affidavit. Its all before Justice Okorowo

Toh
He's claiming to be unbiased though

Remember, that as at the time they got the injunction from Omotosho, they still claimed to be APC members... their stories started changing months later.
I ask again, what documents did they file before omotosho to procure that injunction?

Bro, leave matter.

Ojuntana:
Toh
He's claiming to be unbiased though

Unbiased how? The man is accusing me of being emotional but im sure he has a bigger dog in this fight than mine. 😂

Ojuntana:
Good!! Thus, if I go to court and swear an affidavit that I'm no longer a member of a party or association or if I declare before before a notary public and have it published, can I still be said to be a member of that association?
Secondly, I find it disturbing that you're quoting APC and PDP constitutions in a purely constitutional matter. Are you saying parry constitution can be used to interpret the constitution? Is it valid to use party laws to determine what is implied by the constitution?

Ehen! Better person.😂
Let me make this very simple.
If you swear an affidavit saying you've resigned or ceased to be a member when your membership was not terminated by resignation, failure to pay party dues, etc. Then that's manifestly untrue.

The right way is to resign and then on oath state same to be true. One comes before the other. An affidavit is not a resignation letter. Do you get?

On the APC/PDP Constitution matter. I make reference to them because even the Constitution recognises them in Section 223(1)(2) of the CFRN 1999 as amended. They prescribe rules that members MUST follow. The CFRN is not against it.

Again, since the APC/PDP Constitutions draw validity from the Constitution, the Constitution remains supreme.

Currently, there is no conflict as it concerns the laws of the parties above and the Constitution.

And contrary to what you've said, it is not totally a constitutional issue or how would you determine whether or not a person is a member of a political party without referring to that party's constitutional provision on membership?

phantom:
So why then are the obeying a court injunction keeping their seats that is based on a false document? Don't you understand? You can't claim a document is not evidence enough but turn around to hold on to a court order that is based that false document.. Are you confused? 😂

oil dey your head .

The individuals in question claim their departure from the PDP was justified and have obtained a court injunction to support their position. However, they seem to be contradicting themselves by denying the very act of leaving the party (defection) they used to justify their actions.

There's evidence to suggest they left the PDP: sworn affidavits, pronouncements on the house floor, press conferences, and even meetings with APC officials. Yet, the PDP insists they are still party members despite these actions. I DEY LAFF.

AN OWN GOAL IS A GOAL ....DEM NO DEY CHECK OFFSIDE FOR OWN GOAL .

Wike and team scored an own goal without any pressure. This shows that God is really fighting for Fubara . They simply had no reason to defect.

ZIAZI:
Chei! The suit was not abandoned. Don't you know what an interlocutory order (injunction) is?
Besides, the prayers are different. Who do you this thing😂😂😂

Did Okorowo grant that injunction?

ZIAZI:
Ehen! Better person.😂
Let me make this very simple.
1. If you swear an affidavit saying you've resigned or ceased to be a member when your membership was not terminated by resignation, failure to pay party dues, etc. Then that's manifestly untrue.

The right way is to resign and then on oath state same to be true. One comes before the other. An affidavit is not a resignation letter. Do you get?

2. On the APC/PDP Constitution matter. I make reference to them because even the Constitution recognises them in Section 223(1)(2) of the CFRN 1999 as amended. They prescribe rules that members MUST follow. The CFRN is not against it.

Again, since the APC/PDP Constitutions draw validity from the Constitution, the Constitution remains supreme.

Currently, there is no conflict as it concerns the laws of the parties above and the Constitution.

And contrary to what you've said, it is not totally a constitutional issue or how would you determine whether or not a person is a member of a political party without referring to that party's constitutional provision on membership?

1. What you just described above, is that not perjury? People swear affidavit to declare their age and it is taken as evidence of date of birth. Is affidavit a birth certificate? Note that the members did not just go to court to swear affidavit, they announced on the floor of the House that they are no longer members. So I ask again, If i declare with a notary public that I am no longer a member of an association, have it published in a newspaper and still go to court to swear an affidavit to the same, can I be said to be a member of that association as far as the law is concerned?

2. The section you referred to does not recognise party laws as valid instrument of interpreting the Constitution. It specifically gives a directive on what the membership of the exective of a party must contain. You surely cannot stretch it to claim it gives party laws the right to determine how to be a member and how to exit the party. For example, a party can have different rules for membership but they must ALL have the same rules for the party executive as outlined in that section.

3. Since you already previously accepted that non-payment of party dues and writing of resignation letters are not the only grounds to cease to be a member, I ask you now, are you implying that one can be forced to be a member of an association he wishes to leave? Because if the members wrote to the House to notify them that they are no longer members of a party, waved flags and sang songs of their new party in the House, are you saying the party can write to the House to disregard their letters and insist that those members still remain theirs?

ZIAZI:
Ehen! Better person.😂
Let me make this very simple.
If you swear an affidavit saying you've resigned or ceased to be a member when your membership was not terminated by resignation, failure to pay party dues, etc. Then that's manifestly untrue.

The right way is to resign and then on oath state same to be true. One comes before the other. An affidavit is not a resignation letter. Do you get?

On the APC/PDP Constitution matter. I make reference to them because even the Constitution recognises them in Section 223(1)(2) of the CFRN 1999 as amended. They prescribe rules that members MUST follow. The CFRN is not against it.

Again, since the APC/PDP Constitutions draw validity from the Constitution, the Constitution remains supreme.

Currently, there is no conflict as it concerns the laws of the parties above and the Constitution.

And contrary to what you've said, it is not totally a constitutional issue or how would you determine whether or not a person is a member of a political party without referring to that party's constitutional provision on membership?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LS_VTc7YBo?si=2fGACS7RELMWe4nN
They were welcomed by APC in a massive rally wherein the Rivers APC chairman publicly declared they had defected to the APC. Whoever adviced them to defect finished them kpatapata. Evidence are everywhere.

Noneroone:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LS_VTc7YBo?si=2fGACS7RELMWe4nN
They were welcomed by APC in a massive rally wherein the Rivers APC chairman publicly declared they had defected to the APC. Whoever adviced them to defect finished them kpatapata. Evidence are everywhere.

Thanks o.
As in just imagine how average Nigerian is thinking. People who announced their defection on the floor of the House in broad daylight. Still went to court to swear that they defected and someone is coming to tell us of erroneous defection? It is shameful and repulsive to tell the truth. How many Nigerians can come to the public to say they have resigned from their jobs and their company will back them up to say they were just playing? Yet you see Nigerians enabling politicians to trample and make a mess of our laws. It's very shameful to be factual. If there was no such penalty for defecting which they know see clearly that they will not escape, you think they will turn back to say they never defected?

phantom:
Unbiased how? The man is accusing me of being emotional but im sure he has a bigger dog in this fight than mine. 😂

Haba!! I nor be pikin na. Who does not know what is going on with this people? First they claim to have defected due to division over who the party secretary is. After seeing that PDP held NWC and NEC meetings successfully, they started saying they did not defect.
It will do them fiam. The Cross Rivers members even alleged that they were expelled and did not defect in their case. APC came out during the case to claim their names was not on the party register.
The case is a sure banker. I just hope there's really nothing stopping Fubara and Co from pursuing it.

Ojuntana:
1. What you just described above, is that not perjury? People swear affidavit to declare their age and it is taken as evidence of date of birth. Is affidavit a birth certificate? Note that the members did not just go to court to swear affidavit, they announced on the floor of the House that they are no longer members. So I ask again, If i declare with a notary public that I am no longer a member of an association, have it published in a newspaper and still go to court to swear an affidavit to the same, can I be said to be a member of that association as far as the law is concerned?

2. The section you referred to does not recognise party laws as valid instrument of interpreting the Constitution. It specifically gives a directive on what the membership of the exective of a party must contain. You surely cannot stretch it to claim it gives party laws the right to determine how to be a member and how to exit the party. For example, a party can have different rules for membership but they must ALL have the same rules for the party executive as outlined in that section.

3. Since you already previously accepted that non-payment of party dues and writing of resignation letters are not the only grounds to cease to be a member, I ask you now, are you implying that one can be forced to be a member of an association he wishes to leave? Because if the members wrote to the House to notify them that they are no longer members of a party, waved flags and sang songs of their new party in the House, are you saying the party can write to the House to disregard their letters and insist that those members still remain theirs?

In response to paragraph one, it is said to be perjury when the deponent is "knowingly" telling an untruth. In my opinion, Amaewhule was under the illusion that he had defected, but he failed to follow due process i.e. formally leaving PDP and formally joining APC. There is a prescribed way to do these. You know that already

In response to paragraph two, I only drew your attention to Section 223 in order to show you that the Constitution recognises the Constitution of parties. In peculiar cases, the courts are invited to adjudicate based on issues affecting a party's constitution.

Finally, I'd say that no one in this case is forcing another to be a member. Remember, THERE IS A PROCESS FOR DEFECTION. Assuming I swear to an affidavit claiming to be President of Nigeria and I go to a media house to tell Nigerians that I am the resident, will that make me president automatically? No! There is a process for assuming the Office of President.

In the eyes of the law, the video can best be described as a skit. The flags and symbols mean nothing. The party APC is saying that these guys are not "card-carrying members" which is a requirement if you remember. PDP on the other hand is saying "We are no seised of the information that our lawmakers defected because there is a process to be followed."

LET'S WAIT FOR THE COURT TO DECIDE.

ZIAZI:
In response to paragraph one, it is said to be perjury when the deponent is "knowingly" telling an untruth. In my opinion, Amaewhule was under the illusion that he had defected, but he failed to follow due process i.e. formally leaving PDP and formally joining APC. There is a prescribed way to do these. You know that already

In response to paragraph two, I only drew your attention to Section 223 in order to show you that the Constitution recognises the Constitution of parties. In peculiar cases, the courts are invited to adjudicate based on issues affecting a party's constitution.

Finally, I'd say that no one in this case is forcing another to be a member. Remember, THERE IS A PROCESS FOR DEFECTION. Assuming I swear to an affidavit claiming to be President of Nigeria and I go to a media house to tell Nigerians that I am the resident, will that make me president automatically? No! There is a process for assuming the Office of President.

In the eyes of the law, the video can best be described as a skit. The flags and symbols mean nothing. The party APC is saying that these guys are not "card-carrying members" which is a requirement if you remember. PDP on the other hand is saying "We are no seised of the information that our lawmakers defected because there is a process to be followed."

LET'S WAIT FOR THE COURT TO DECIDE.

You just keep shooting yourself in the foot. Amaewhule was under the impression that he defected? So who is telling him now that he has not defected since he is now claiming that he never defected? You have still not told me where it is written in our laws the process of leaving a party. You have not furnished me with the process from our laws or PDP's laws. What is clear and I have said it is that you cannot force membership of an association on anyone. You cannot say there is a procedure for leaving. Even the army as regimented, if you abandon the army, no one will say you are still an army officer. To all intent and purposes, you are no longer a soldier and will be court martialled for desertion. How much more in a civilian setting?
It is also laughable that you describe proceedings in plenary of the House as skit-making. Is the House now a comedy house? Haba! Have some shame now. We can also say the 7-day ultimatum they gave Fubara is a skit. Do you agree?
The fact still remains that there is no prescribed process for defection in s109. What it says is that there should be satisfactory evidence that the member has defected. And it is beyond doubt that a letter read on the floor of the House is satisfactory evidence.
Again, go and read Justice Taiwo's judgement. The members claimed they never defected but were expelled and are not members of APC. APC corroborated the claim. But the judge ruled them defected and kicked them out.
Defection is with satisfactory evidence on the floor of the House and not letter of resignation or membership of another party.

Ojuntana:
You just keep shooting yourself in the foot. Amaewhule was under the impression that he defected? So who is telling him now that he has not defected since he is now claiming that he never defected? You have still not told me where it is written in our laws the process of leaving a party. You have not furnished me with the process from our laws or PDP's laws. What is clear and I have said it is that you cannot force membership of an association on anyone. You cannot say there is a procedure for leaving. Even the army as regimented, if you abandon the army, no one will say you are still an army officer. To all intent and purposes, you are no longer a soldier and will be court martialled for desertion. How much more in a civilian setting?
It is also laughable that you describe proceedings in plenary of the House as skit-making. Is the House now a comedy house? Haba! Have some shame now. We can also say the 7-day ultimatum they gave Fubara is a skit. Do you agree?
The fact still remains that there is no prescribed process for defection in s109. What it says is that there should be satisfactory evidence that the member has defected. And it is beyond doubt that a letter read on the floor of the House is satisfactory evidence.
Again, go and read Justice Taiwo's judgement. The members claimed they never defected but were expelled and are not members of APC. APC corroborated the claim. But the judge ruled them defected and kicked them out.
Defection is with satisfactory evidence on the floor of the House and not letter of resignation or membership of another party.

You're obviously not going through my posts to understand, but to argue. Attempted defection is not defection.

Let the courts decide.

ZIAZI:
You're obviously not going through my posts to understand, but to argue. Attempted defection is not defection.

Let the courts decide.

It's no longer erroneous defection
It's now attempted defection
This guy

Ojuntana:
It's no longer erroneous defection
It's now attempted defection
This guy

Wahala dey oooo!
Erroneous +Attempted detection = No defection.😂😂😂

I just read the judgement of Justice Taiwo Taiwo in the Cross Rivers Assembly saga, and all I can say is that the matter is slightly similar.

The matter was instituted by the PDP unlike in Amaewhule's case. That's a huge factor there lacking in Amaewhule's case.

Again, the FHC can give a different judgement in the instant case because the facts are different.

Let the courts decide.

ZIAZI:
Wahala dey oooo!
Erroneous +Attempted detection = No defection.😂😂😂

I just read the judgement of Justice Taiwo Taiwo in the Cross Rivers Assembly saga, and all I can say is that the matter is slightly similar.

The matter was instituted by the PDP unlike in Amaewhule's case. That's a huge factor there lacking in Amaewhule's case.

Again, the FHC can give a different judgement in the instant case because the facts are different.

Let the courts decide.

How are the facts different

Ojuntana:
How are the facts different

It's your turn to go and read the facts of the case.
I'll be here waiting.

ZIAZI:
It's your turn to go and read the facts of the case.
I'll be here waiting.

As your lordship pleases
I will attempt to read but I hope I don't read erroneously

Ojuntana:

As your lordship pleases
I will attempt to read but I hope I don't read erroneously

😂😂😂😂😂