2019elections:


U just half smart. If inec cancels poling units due to irregularities, court cant upturn. Highest na rerun. The result he presented was not recognized by inec.

Oga,the electoral act empowers only presiding officers to cancel unit results and no other and in imo,collation officers did the cancelation.again,inec didnt bring any counter result.once results are declared at units,it cannot be canceled except by the courts.same magic ikpeazu performed in 2015 in obingwa is being replicated.
Ill refer you to
Kakih vs pdp 2010 supra
Otti vs ikpeazu and ors 2015
Umana vs inec 2015 per jsc kekere ekun

seniormallam:

With the disqualification of nwosu....... no need for any runoff again........ Even if all the cancelled votes is added for Hope........he lost still.

Well, the Supreme Court will have to decide if the vote cast for AA are wasted votes and irrelevant in deciding the total vote cast during the election.

seniormallam:


Accredited voters. 823,743
Valid votes. 739,485

Do the maths yourself Bro.........

No.mind dem, with all canceled votes, he no still win. BTW, what's d proof that he got all votes in d cancelled regions?

garfield1:

Oga,the electoral act empowers only presiding officers to cancel unit results and no other and in imo,collation officers did the cancelation.again,inec didnt bring any counter result.once results are declared at units,it cannot be canceled except by the courts.same magic ikpeazu performed in 2015 in obingwa is being replicated.
Ill refer you to
Kakih vs pdp 2010 supra
Otti vs ikpeazu and ors 2015
Umana vs inec 2015 per jsc kekere ekun

Now, ask urself who cancelled the votes? Presiding officer or rec? Were the result sheets duly signed? In what ground were they cancelled? Pls, don't let mbaka's prophecy cloud ur judgement.

Those cancelled votes, what's the party breakdown?

garfield1:

You are funny.did i say otherwise? Since itsfake,bring the genuine news.i hope you will apologise when your master loses officially

Ihedioha is not losing, how can someone that won only 2 lgas out of 27 be declared a winner? It's not possible. As a matter of fact his case will be struck out on technicalities because he wasn't a candidate in the said election

seniormallam:


Accredited voters. 823,743
Valid votes. 739,485

Do the maths yourself Bro.........

As a senior mallam,you suppose reason well na.we argued this already yesterday.
Hope said his votes from 388 units were illegally cancelled ohhhhhh.cant you get it?
Again,the supreme court does not calculate over voting through accredited votes or card readers.they do that using the voters register.imo has 2.2 million voters and if uzodinma polled 2.1 mil,it is regular as far as it doesn't overshoot the registered votes.this was re-echoed last week in otti vs ikpeazu.
Please see all supreme court rulings from 2014 till now and stop stressing me

garfield1:

As a senior mallam,you suppose reason well na.we argued this already yesterday.
Hope said his votes from 388 units were illegally cancelled ohhhhhh.cant you get it?
Again,the supreme court does not calculate over voting through accredited votes or card readers.they do that using the voters register.imo has 2.2 million voters and if uzodinma polled 2.1 mil,it is regular as far as it doesn't overshoot the registered votes.this was re-echoed last week in otti vs ikpeazu.
Please see all supreme court rulings from 2014 till now and stop stressing me

U just de yawn nonsense.. How will numbers on voters register exceed accredited voters?

garfield1:

As a senior mallam,you suppose reason well na.we argued this already yesterday.
Hope said his votes from 388 units were illegally cancelled ohhhhhh.cant you get it?
Again,the supreme court does not calculate over voting through accredited votes or card readers.they do that using the voters register.imo has 2.2 million voters and if uzodinma polled 2.1 mil,it is regular as far as it doesn't overshoot the registered votes.this was re-echoed last week in otti vs ikpeazu.
Please see all supreme court rulings from 2014 till now and stop stressing me

Cancelled votes that he cannot prove........

garfield1:

As a senior mallam,you suppose reason well na.we argued this already yesterday.
Hope said his votes from 388 units were illegally cancelled ohhhhhh.cant you get it?
Again,the supreme court does not calculate over voting through accredited votes or card readers.they do that using the voters register.imo has 2.2 million voters and if uzodinma polled 2.1 mil,it is regular as far as it doesn't overshoot the registered votes.this was re-echoed last week in otti vs ikpeazu.
Please see all supreme court rulings from 2014 till now and stop stressing me

No de listen to gossip. A party's votes in an election can't be cancelled except the candidacy was rejected. Does that mean only his votes were cancelled in those units while other parties stood? No de reason with hope, reason with me.

garfield1:

Oga,the electoral act empowers only presiding officers to cancel unit results and no other and in imo,collation officers did the cancelation.again,inec didnt bring any counter result.once results are declared at units,it cannot be canceled except by the courts.same magic ikpeazu performed in 2015 in obingwa is being replicated.
Ill refer you to
Kakih vs pdp 2010 supra
Otti vs ikpeazu and ors 2015
Umana vs inec 2015 per jsc kekere ekun

How market? God has put you, children of iberiberism and Mbaka to shame

2019elections:

Now, ask urself who cancelled the votes? Presiding officer or rec? Were the result sheets duly signed? In what ground were they cancelled? Pls, don't let mbaka's prophecy cloud ur judgement.

Those cancelled votes, what's the party breakdown?

According to the tribunal proceedings,the votes were cancelled by collation officers instead of p.os.copies of the result sheets showed that it was duly signed although not by all parties which isn't compulsory? They were cancelled based on overvoting which they defined wrongly.i dont know the party breakdown.i have been against ihedioha right from march 9 when he was illegally declared

2019elections:


No de listen to gossip. A party's votes in an election can't be cancelled except the candidacy was rejected. Does that mean only his votes were cancelled in those units while other parties stood? No de reason with hope, reason with me.

Don't mind him......... So, in those units they counted for other candidates and left only Hopes vote..........Ihedioha this victory go too sweet

2019elections:


U just de yawn nonsense.. How will numbers on voters register exceed accredited voters?

I dont like arguing with small boys.have you checked supreme court definition of overvoting? Why not check it first before arguing blindly

seniormallam:

Don't mind him......... So, in those units they counted for other candidates and left only Hopes vote..........Ihedioha this victory go too sweet

They cancelled the entire results and hope scored heavily there while others had minor votes

garfield1:

If so,its over for pdp

Ntooor!!

garfield1:

I dont like arguing with small boys.have you checked supreme court definition of overvoting? Why not check it first before arguing blindly

If adult no want take corrections, pikin go humble am.

freeze001:


Ntooor!!

Down ihedioha,down pdp.

garfield1:

I dont like arguing with small boys.have you checked supreme court definition of overvoting? Why not check it first before arguing blindly

See, for cases of over voting, total votes must not exceed accredited voters. Voter register comes in play if accredited voters exceed numbers in voter register.

garfield1:

How can? There was no case challenging uzodinma's candidacy.the case was between aa and nwosu.the court only said that it discovered that he was also nominated in apc thereby nullifying his nomination in aa.apc were never joined in that suit,it doesn't concern them.it starts and end with nwosu.parties are bound by their pleadings.a court cannot rule against a party not sued.ill refer you to kakih vs pdp 2010 supra
See dingyadi vs inec and ors supra 2010
See atiku vs buhari 2019 per jca garba

Do you know the meaning of 'supra'? Is there anywhere you gave the citations of the cases you quoted previously? Don't do copy and paste ignorantly please.

Subduer:

Mbaka just want to obtain

Mbaka ticket don cut

Subduer:

Mbaka just want to obtain

And Ihedioha wins. God bless PDP
God Ndi Imo
Imo shall be great again

garfield1:

You are right.those his 388 units are from 11 lgas and from my calculation,he didnt get the spread except the supreme court omits that.during the zamfara case after apc were vitiated,the supreme court said the Next in line should be sworn in if they met the spread

The requirement in Zamfara was for the party/candidate with the highest number of votes, after APC disqualification, simple! The court did not contemplate spread in declaring the 2nd highest votes winner Governor and it is clear that by calculation, PDP in Zamfara did not meet the 2/3 requirement spread because APC had a landslide victory. It only lost because of the penchant of the party for disobeying valid court orders so the elections and victory were an exercise in futility for APC.

https://www.msn.com/en-xl/africa/nigeria/court-cancels-apc-votes-declares-pdp-winner-in-zamfara/ar-AABQLLP

https://punchng.com/breaking-supreme-court-nullifies-apcs-candidates-elections-declares-pdp-winner-of-zamfara-polls/

2019elections:


See, for cases of over voting, total votes must not exceed accredited voters. Voter register comes in play if accredited voters exceed numbers in voter register.

Yesterday, Nigeria’s Supreme Court dismissed appeals filed by opposition candidates in four different states challenging the declaration of incumbents as governors. In their dismissal of the cases, the justices of that court affirmed that the incumbents were duly elected by the people. The four states were Abia, Delta, Taraba and Niger. By the judgement, Okezie Ikpeazu, Ifeanyi Okowa, Darius Ishaku and Abubakar Bello have all been affirmed as duly elected governors of those states.
Of particular interest to me is Abia, where I am from. I was part of that election and I know how Ikpeazu, his godfathers and their paid mercenaries within INEC and Nigeria’s security agencies vitiated the process.
In [b]the case of Abia, the Supreme Court ruled that Okezie Ikpeazu was duly elected as governor. The court decided that the person challenging Ikpeazu’s declaration, Alex Otti, failed to prove his case by relying on a report of Card Reader accreditation. Justice Paul Galinje who read the judgment which, following the strange 2015 tradition of that court, was unanimous, argued that Otti should have relied only on the voters’ register in proving his case. He held that the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) governorship candidate in that election should have related the voters register to the specific areas where the elections were affected. If Otti did this, from what the Supreme Court judges are implying, he would have won his appeal.
Well, nobody could have done what the court is proposing. No human being can do it. It’s that simple.
And I have to agree that what Justice Galinje suggested was verbatim what was written in Nigeria’s electoral act. But that law is laughable and was clearly designed to make ridicule of the sacred process of voting. The law the Supreme Court is solely relying on is the law that insists that over-voting can only be proven at the level of the polling unit, and by comparing the election result in that polling unit to the number of registered voters in the same unit.
This law means that a person seeking to be governor in, say, Abia - a state which has about 2700 polling units - will have to tender result sheets from the whole 2700 units and tender also 2700 booklets of voters’ register, each for each polling unit, before the court, for him to have a chance of proving over-voting in the entirety of the state. Note that this is a total of 5,400 documents!
Note also that, as a litigant before the election trial court, you have only a maximum of 14 days to tender these documents. It is what the Electoral Act provided. In fact, the judges of the trial court, in their wisdom, can choose to give you less number of days and tell you it would be enough. I saw it happen in 2015.
Further, you are not going to gather these 5,400 documents and dump them before the court. You will present them one after the other, in each case first seeking the leave of the court and the consent of the defence lawyers (who will take their time to scrutinize each of them), for the documents to be accepted and admitted. All of this in only two weeks! 5400 documents!
But that’s not all that is wrong with the law. After tendering the documents, you will compare INEC’s written results – captured in the result sheets - with the figures in the voters’ register. It is only when the results are more than the figures in the voters’ register that you can establish over-voting.
Well, the problem with that is that the voters’ register is not a live document. The current voters’ register was compiled years ago, and some names on it are fake. In Ekiti, names like Mike Tyson have once been found in the voters’ register.
Because we are coming from a culture where politicians simply wrote fake figures as election results, voters’ registers were over-bloated by same politicians to accommodate the bogus figures they would be writing in future elections.
So long as what you wrote as election result is equal to, or less than, the figures in the voters’ register, you are fine within the electoral law.
INEC's voters' register is still over-bloated. It still has many fake names and fake voters.
Yet, according to the Electoral Act, it does not matter that some people who registered in that polling unit may have relocated before the election day, or too sick to come out to vote, or even dead, we still must rely on the voters’ register to prove over-voting.
Alex Otti’s argument, both in 2015 and in 2019, is that we cannot determine over-voting by relying on voters’ register alone. Over-voting can easily be determined by comparing the number of people who came out to vote on election day, as against the number of people who actually voted. To do this, just print out the Card Reader report of all the people who were accredited and compare it to the result INEC wrote and tendered in its official result sheet; if the results exceed the number of people who were accredited, then there was over-voting.
Anyone with half a brain knows that this is a sound argument. It is also the only fair way of ascertaining the true number of people who voted. The problem, however, is that you cannot wake up a man pretending to be asleep. Collectively, the (wo)men in Nigeria’s Supreme Court are pretending to be asleep in the country’s electoral jurisprudence. No one can wake them up.
They are not new to elections in Nigeria. They saw how, for the first time, an opposition party was able to defeat a sitting president in 2015. They know that the victory was only made possible by the advent of Card Readers. Yet they have consistently thrown Card Reader reports into the dustbin.
Card Readers were introduced by INEC under the credible leadership of Professor Attahiru Jega, to curtail the penchant of politicians and their INEC collaborators for inflating votes. The central idea behind its introduction was the reduction of human interference in the electoral process. INEC felt the voter’s card, which was the only instrument that permitted anyone to vote, needed an overhaul of its architecture. For this reason, the permanent voter’s card (PVC) was changed from a laminated paper to a plastic card with embedded chips that contained the bearer’s bio data. The chips can only be read by a machine, not humans. So, naturally, the evolution of the voter’s card made the use of card readers compulsory.
Again, anyone with half a brain would understand this.[/b]
An observant Supreme Court would have realized that the evolution of the voter’s card has also overtaken the Electoral Act. The country’s electoral laws should have been immediately amended and signed to reflect the changed times.
And, in a thinking Supreme Court, if this did not happen, you would have seen independence of thoughts amongst the justices. You would have seen one or two or three of them demonstrating their conviction that the court, being the highest in the land, could make a case law (a permissible judicial tradition that makes declarations on certain situations to permanently institute them as laws of the land) admitting the Card Reader as a veritable means of voter accreditation and a strong evidence against over-voting.
But that did not happen in 2015 when Nigeria first witnessed the wonder of the Card Reader. Of course, I would have been surprised if it happened in 2019. A sleeping, retrogressive Supreme Court will never reverse itself. In unanimity, it once again endorsed an election in Abia where people simply sat in their living rooms and wrote figures.
It is convenient for these judges in the country’s highest court to cite the constitution and electoral act as their excuse for affirming injustice, playing the ostrich and feigning ignorance of their powers to make case laws. But the impact of their judgments will keep reverberating across the lengths and breadths of this country in future elections. The argument is simple: it is difficult to prove over-voting with the outdated processes outlined by the Electoral Act, so the most important action to take in an election is to get declared winner by INEC. Every candidate will deploy everything within their control to achieve this aim.The end result, as we have been seeing since post-2015, is heightened electoral violence; such as the scale witnessed in the recent elections held in Kogi and Bayelsa. They are testimonies to the damage the Supreme Court's tacit endorsement of electoral brigandage that is the rejection of Card Reader has done to the polity. And, even in the coming Edo State election, we are sure to see things that will make us remember, once again, that when it was time for supposed learned justices to rise and save their country’s democracy, they feigned slumber.

How far?

freeze001:


The requirement in Zamfara was for the party/candidate with the highest number of votes, after APC disqualification, simple! The court did not contemplate spread in declaring the 2nd highest votes winner Governor and it is clear that by calculation, PDP in Zamfara did not meet the 2/3 requirement spread because APC had a landslide victory. It only lost because of the penchant of the party for disobeying valid court orders so the elections and victory were an exercise in futility for APC.

https://www.msn.com/en-xl/africa/nigeria/court-cancels-apc-votes-declares-pdp-winner-in-zamfara/ar-AABQLLP

https://punchng.com/breaking-supreme-court-nullifies-apcs-candidates-elections-declares-pdp-winner-of-zamfara-polls/

Oga,read your links very well.the cjn clearly said the next party that met the requirements.with apc votes gone,pdp now won all the 14 lgas.why the blind argument

freeze001:


Do you know the meaning of 'supra'? Is there anywhere you gave the citations of the cases you quoted previously? Don't do copy and paste ignorantly please.

Down pdp

There was no requirement for the 2/3 spread to declare PDP winner of all elected positions in Zamfara where they scored the highest votes after APC. Where Zamfara scored 90,000 and PDP scored say only 3000 votes, would still and was still declared as winner and sworn in. Your assertion of spread was completely untrue and that is why I pointed it out to you clearly.

garfield1:

Oga,read your links very well. the cjn clearly said the next party that met the requirements. with apc votes gone,pdp now won all the 14 lgas.why the blind argument

garfield1:

You are right.those his 388 units are from 11 lgas and from my calculation,he didnt get the spread except the supreme court omits that. during the zamfara case after apc were vitiated,the supreme court said the Next in line should be sworn in if they met the spread

Subduer:

[color=#990000][ Their confidence is in Mbaka's satanic Adoration prophecies. These people who REFUSE to STUDY the Bible in order to discern what is right or wrong./color]

Mbaka that has started denying his statement again.........

So NTA cannot at least goto supreme court today to at least gather reasonable numbers of viewers today..

seniormallam:

Mbaka that has started denying his statement again.........

There must be a video recording of his prophecies.