seunmsg:


I am glad the CJN did not cow to the silly wishes of the desperate PDP to include compromised and politically tainted justices like Mary Odili and Ngwuta on the panel. With the above panel, I’m very sure justice will be served.

djoey89:
Atiku cant win buhari in court, the system is compromised. But it is good he goes to court and not throw his hands up.

Jimi24:


I hope Odilli, Mgwunta and Rhodes Viviour offered to recuse themselves. If not I will fight to ensure non of them gets to be CJN.
You cannot sit on a panel where you have conflict of interest or relatives are affected parties

TonyeBarcanista:
Updates from the Supreme Court:

The Supreme Court of Nigeria after listening to arguments from all the parties in the case, agreed and consented to it.

The court then called for the adoption of the appeals as filed.

Dr. Livy Uzochukwu, on behalf of the PDP and Atiku/Obi called the file numbers and dates of the main appeal plus other interlocutory appeals and adopted same.

That is to say, all the six (6) appeals filed by the PDP and Atiku/Obi were admitted by the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

In adopting his appeals, Dr. Uzochukwu on the issue of qualifications, told the court that the 2nd Respondent, President Buhari failed to explain the disparity on the names Muhammadu and Mohamed as seen in the different statements of results tendered in evidence by Chief Olanipekun.

The CJN interjected and asked Dr. Uzochukwu if what he is saying is already in his appeals and he said yes. The CJN then asked him to make particular reference to the paragraph in his address and save the court time.

Dr. Uzorchukwu made reference to his written address in page 19 to 20 of his written address, Paragraph 4.82 to 4.83. He also cited an authority from a case on plastic industry limited vs Titilayo and 14 Nigeria Weekly Law Report of 2019 in paragraph e f.

He quoted the authority on the discrepancy in the names as cited the court ruling saying that in such event, a third name is required to substantiate the claims.

He also stated that there was no time President Buhari made any pleading (s) in the lower court (court of appeal) that that the name Mohamed and Muhammadu as seen in the two different statements of results are the same.

Dr. Uzochukwu again argued that, President Buhari also failed woefully to present to the lower court any of the three certificates he claimed to have acquired as seen in his affidavit.

That nobody has ever sighted a photocopy or original copies of the said certificates he claimed to have obtained from the schools he attended.

And there is no testimonial from the principals or headmaster of the schools he claimed to have attended.

He also submitted that there was no testimonial or certificates from “officer cadet”

On the issue of server:
Dr. Uzochukwu argued that the 1st Respondent denied having a sever. He further submitted that if the 1st respondent appreciated what a sever is, it should never had denied owing one.

He submitted that the 1st Respondent indeed owns and manage a server, citing some law reports to back his arguments.

Finally he argued that the lower court relied on section 52(2) of the electoral act 2010 to contend that electronic election is prohibited.

Saying that the section of the electoral act 2010, relief upon by the appeal court was deleted by the amendments of 2015.

That the new section 52(2) says otherwise concerning electronic voting or elections.

The CJN asked him if he drew the attention of the lower court to this serious infractions and he said it is on record that the PDP and Atiku/Obi did, eloquently.

The CJN called for time and Dr. Uzochukwu was forced to end his arguments

TonyeBarcanista:
Updates from the Supreme Court:
Note:

Note that the appeal court quoted the old version of section 52(2) which prohibited electronic transmission of results instead of the new section that allowed INEC to use its discretion in the conduct and transmission of election results

TonyeBarcanista:
Updates from the Supreme Court:

Drama in court as INEC counsel contradicts appeal court ruling on section 52(2) of the electoral act

One of the justices of the Supreme Court asked the INEC counsel to read to the court section 52(2) quoted by the appeal court.

He read the two section 52(2) of both the old and new amendments and contradicted the position of the lower court.

Note:

Note that the appeal court quoted the old version of section 52(2) which prohibited electronic transmission of results instead of the new section that allowed INEC to use its discretion in the conduct and transmission of election results

garfield1:
At they seated yet?

TonyeBarcanista:
Updates from the Supreme Court:

Drama in court as INEC counsel contradicts appeal court ruling on section 52(2) of the electoral act

One of the justices of the Supreme Court asked the INEC counsel to read to the court section 52(2) quoted by the appeal court.

He read the two section 52(2) of both the old and new amendments and contradicted the position of the lower court.

Note:

Note that the appeal court quoted the old version of section 52(2) which prohibited electronic transmission of results instead of the new section that allowed INEC to use its discretion in the conduct and transmission of election results

fergie001:

The other day you were complaining of how Agim was preferred to JSC rather than Agube who is many places his senior.

Today, unfortunately... You are not complaining how Okoro (9th), Sanusi(11th), Eko (13th) and Sanusi(who was just made a JSC May this year) is on the panel.

The CJN has the right to pick whomever, but this is a precedence....hope you won't complain when Abang retires at FHC.

knightsTempler:
Let’s be honest with ourselves for once, Atiku is wasting his time, the judiciary has long be hijacked by Buhari and the cabals when they pushed Onoghen out and appointment Tanko. The last hope of Man (Judiciary) is in the hands of unlearned, unpatriotic, achaic, desperate, choleric and ill-experience folks like Tanko...

Muhammadu buhari is the law, the constitution of Nigeria, who dares to challenge his wrong doings, the Judiciary is under his foot, the truth is Nigeria is operating with an head of state disguised as a president.

id911:



We are waiting to see what the Supreme Court has to say on this. We hope that the right thing is done and H.E Alhaji Atiku Abubakar's stolen mandate is retrieved

garfield1:

If you had nothing important about this case to say,you hold your peace please.i wonder when a tradition became a legality

seunmsg:


I am glad the CJN did not cow to the silly wishes of the desperate PDP to include compromised and politically tainted justices like Mary Odili and Ngwuta on the panel. With the above panel, I’m very sure justice will be served.

chio75:

Why is d judges always asking 4 time,is it 2 confer with their principals & take directives or what?.
Truth be told,PDP has a very good case, history therefore beckons on d Supreme court judges 2 stand up 2 be counted or pervert d course of Justice & 4va hv their names stuck in d mud.

TheDestroyer:
This one just keeps wasting his stolen wealth on stupid lawyers deceiving him instead of him to just go chill and enjoy in Dubai.

Enemyofpeace:
As Tanko dey inside forget it, na dogo go win the case again

garfield1:

When was it stolen

TonyeBarcanista:
Updates from the Supreme Court:

Chief Wole Olanipekun, while adopting his replies and cross appeals argued that the PDP and Atiku/Obi’s counsel, Dr. Livy Uzochukwu cannot probate and reprobate at the same times.

He was making reference to the issue of the names and judgment of the lower court on the name of the PDP counsel.

Note:

The matter of the names of the PDP and Atiku/Obi counsel, Dr. Uzochukwu is different.

While Dr. Uzochukwu sufficiently satisfied the lower court that Livinus and Livy are the same, President Buhari made no pleadings or submitted no evidence or affidavit to prove that Muhammadu Buhari and Mohamed Buhari are the same.

Sukueponmalu:
Atiku the thief

id911:


When INEC manufactured votes for APC and Buhari prior to the day of elections rather than using the actual votes of the people that gave absolute victory to Alhaji Atiku

id911:


You don't stay in Oshogbo and accused a judge of being politically tainted simply because you're supporting your evil party. Most times, when I come across some of your ridiculous comments, it baffles me how one could write in such a manner. You have to tone down because some of us witnessed how daring Abacha's disciples were but they quickly disappeared from the scene immediately Abacha was deleted. This regime will come and go while Nigeria remains. You don't have to rubbish every institution just for crumbs thrown at you

Premiumwriter:
Make Atiku go rest joor. Buhari policies these days seems to be making sense.


We are liking the man small small

TonyeBarcanista:
Updates from the Supreme Court:

Chief Wole Olanipekun, while adopting his replies and cross appeals argued that the PDP and Atiku/Obi’s counsel, Dr. Livy Uzochukwu cannot probate and reprobate at the same times.

He was making reference to the issue of the names and judgment of the lower court on the name of the PDP counsel.

Note:

The matter of the names of the PDP and Atiku/Obi counsel, Dr. Uzochukwu is different.

While Dr. Uzochukwu sufficiently satisfied the lower court that Livinus and Livy are the same, President Buhari made no pleadings or submitted no evidence or affidavit to prove that Muhammadu Buhari and Mohamed Buhari are the same.

garfield1:

How does atiku have a good case? In what manner?

seunmsg:


You are talking nonsense. Where were you when PDP rubbished the president of the court of appeal?

Justice Odili and Ngwuta are well know PDP loyalist. Their ties to PDP is not something anybody can dispute so I’m even nice to them in my initial post.

Whether I live in Osogbo or Onitsha, I’m a Nigerian and well entitled to my opinion. The overall interest of Nigeria is what guides my comments and not silly partisanship or ethnic considerations. You can start skipping my comments if they make you cry.