₦airaland Forum

Ephemmm:
From my observation, it is evident you don't know the principle of separation of power between the Legislature, Executive and Judiciary. The only arm of government saddled with the responsibility of interpretation of law and policies is Judiciary, and this is where AGF is being categorized. AGF do not belong to Legislative arm: please stop displaying your ignorance further.

Nigerian constitution and INEC recognized Audu and his Deputy as contestant: the death of either of them CANNOT invalidate the votes they command from electorates.

You need to grow up.

you have crowned it all with your ignorance in this issue. AGF/minster of justice isn't & can't be at the judiciary arm of government, but rather executive arm. Guess I have been debating with one who doesn't know his onus period!

Metuh & pdp deserves an award in super imbecility walahi.

ldpele:
you have crowned it all with your ignorance in this issue. AGF/minster of justice isn't & can't be at the judiciary arm of government, but rather executive arm. Guess I have been debating with one who doesn't know his onus period!

Imagine! Their appointment is based on whose recommendations? The fact that they operate closely with executives does not eraze the fact that they belong to judicial arm as they are neither enact nor make laws. Get it right!

Ephemmm:
Imagine! Their appointment is based on whose recommendations? The fact that they operate closely with executives does not eraze the fact that they belong to judicial arm as they are neither enact nor make laws. Get it right!

aint u funny? Recommendations from who? Am becoming to believe am talking to the wrong person. Are u confusing the CJN to the AGF? U av been making a lot of laughable comments. Will repeat it that the AGF/minister of justice isn't in the judicial arm of government but executive.

petiteee:
dunce!

You're a bastad

gawu1:
Your argument is childish-like , which can be refuted with child-like mentality.
During Nigeria vs Angola match in which Okwaraji slumped and died in the field of play, the match was not ended and Angola declared winner. Instead, he was substituted and the match continued. This was because the death of Okwaraji, a player from Nigerian team, did not translate to mean the death of entire Nigerian team.
In team games, where a player of a team is injured, he/she can be substituted with another player. Even in the case where red card is issued the team would have to play short-one, but would not outrightly be disqualified. This apply to election by implication; even in the eyes of the Law election contest is team issue. No one contest in an election, except that he/she is fielded by a political party and some cases must have running-mate. Thus, You have the party, the candidate, and the running-mate, all who campaign and canvass for votes together, and who either win or lose election together. Since the three are one each has equal stakes. A Vote because of one is a vote for all. In other words, a party has not separate votes from that of its candidate neither does the running-mate receive separate numbers of votes from that of the main candidate. In a Governorship contest, we have three persons by Law who have rights over the same votes cast. Thus, you have the party, the main candidate and his running-mate comprising a team who canvass for votes.
In this Kogi case, we have team-APC with APC, Audu and Falake vs team-PDP with PDP, Wada and his running mate. That Audu is out from team-APC does not mean APC and Falake have no rights to the gains of the team. Logically, Team-APC would only substitute Audu and the game continue.
Please, someone should response to these simple test with impartial mind:
1. Is APC/PDP as party not entitle to the votes recorded by its candidate?
2. On which party platform do candidates contest the election?
3. Was it the personal disposition of the APC candidate that won the party majority votes?
4. Why did PDP candidate recorded lower votes than APC candidate?
5. Did the election results reflected the wishes of Kogi people?
6. Were it only APC and PDP that contested the election?
7. by law, who sponsor a candidate in election?
8. Is it fair to ask Which party has more votes so far in the inconclusive election?
9. Would it be fair if the party with behind votes is outrightly declared winner just because a part of the party with majority votes is missing?
10. Which party did the people of Kogi state preferred to rule them based on result of the election?
11. Why is APC insisting that election should be concluded without necessarily conducting fresh one?
12. Why is PDP interested in concluding the election, but without APC?
13. Could APC/PDP have won Kogi election with another candidate other than Audu/Wada?
14. What is the popular opinion in Kogi regarding to what should be done?
15. Who want to take from Peter to pay Paul between APC with clearly leading votes that want the election to be concluded but not fresh one or PDP with little behind votes that calls for outright continuity of the election without APC or fresh election?
At any rate, let us not forget so soon the joint Yar'adua/Jonathan tick saga, Ameachi vs PDP, or Buhari vs Jonathan/PDP. The first case teaches us that a vote for one remains a vote for all even in the absence of one. The second case shows that even if there is exist/introduction, disqualification/substitution or dropping/changing, suffice the stakes of other(s). The third case is a case of every one of the three has right to claim the whole gains even as other(s) renounce theirs.

You don't need to include the insults but then again, I will still reply. I don't know if you were there at the match when Okwaraji was alive o but even if you were there and that was how they played it, it will suffice for you know that the analogy of a football team can't be used to depict the an election process, for one, the football game allows for substitution as part of the game from the laws that set the game up.

So gimme another example that doesn't allow substitution during competition....