₦airaland Forum

helinues:
As in, I have also been reasoning it since the judgment was delivered.

Mbaka did not see any visions, he was given an hint earlier

That guy has always been a con artist and professional extortionist whose existence is driven by the love of money

RuudVanNisteroy:
How on earth will voters that voted 'massively' for APC in the same polling booth in the Governorship election now vote for another party in the House of Assembly election a second later?

Like i said, they voted for candidacy, and not for party.


I'm not supporting them, but i'm answering your question

LaMujer:
[s]
Like i said, they voted for candidacy, and not for party.


I'm not supporting them, but i'm answering your question[/s]

Does not explain why APC did not win a single seat and still won the governorship

RuudVanNisteroy:
Does not explain why APC did not win a single seat and still won the governorship

score goals like RVN and not like Rashford.


i told you, they voted for individuals, and none of the APC candidates appealed to them enough.

But Uzodinma appealed to them, and they voted for him. cest fini

LaMujer:
score goals like RVN and not like Rashford.


i told you, they voted for individuals, and none of the APC candidates appealed to them enough.

But Uzodinma appealed to them, and they voted for him. cest fini

Your a joker defending this blatant fraud

RuudVanNisteroy:
Your a joker defending this blatant fraud

I'm not defending fraud, but you should be logical. you don't have proof do you?


When Ihedioha won, you didnt exclaim of the 100% inflation of accredited voters o, because your man won. and now that Hope won, as a result of the incompetence and laxity of your Ihedioha, you're screaming murder.


Murder kill una there!

garfield1:
Akpabio and oshiomhole,ortom and wike won thier units with 1000 plus votes

I know. judgement may be judicially correct but morally wrong. I blame inec and election petition tribunal for carelessness. there are a lot of loopholes in our constitution and electoral laws. I respect you for correct and technical analysis by using those loopholes

LaMujer:
I'm not defending fraud, but you should be logical. you don't have proof do you?


When Ihedioha won, you didnt exclaim of the 100% inflation of accredited voters o, because your man won. and now that Hope won, as a result of the incompetence and laxity of your Ihedioha, you're screaming murder.


Murder kill una there!

And you wonder why Nigeria is the poverty and corruption capital of the world. Keep supporting evil.

garfield1:
Inec didnt do their calculations well.according to the electoral act,overvoting is calculated using voters register.the number you are seeing is from only card readers but legally,people can vote without card readers

So the number of accreditated voters increases or changes?

You mean 236,000 persons were not accreditated with card readers but manually and they ALL belonged to only one candidate?

If it was the persons in the 338 units that were accreditated manually, is it that EVERY single voter in those units voted for one candidate?

You guys should fear God!!!

Mynd44:
I think we all have to wait for the full results. I am also curious about the numbers and want to check the justifications

Pls don't let them deceive you.

Listen to me.

Hope Uzodimma forged result with fake INEC result sheet and INEC Returning Officer and Collation Officer stroke it out as fake because other party agents did not even sign the result sheets and only APC and one other party had results on the results sheets out of over 5 candidates, how come

At the election tribunal, this incident was brought up, Tribunal called on INEC to testify and INEC testified that the result sheets were forged and not issued by them INEC, so tribunal nullified Hope Uzodimma's claim.


It went to Appeal Court, the same case was brought up, INEC again testifies the result sheets were forged and the Appeal Court Judge still went further that the result should be called out, and only APC and one other party's result were legible, the person calling the result said he couldn't see other party candidate's results clearly, so he was asked to call out Hopes results and total number of Hope's acclaimed vote exceeded total number of accredited voters and was still not enough to counter Ihedioha's total votes.


So don't let them fool you, this is pure coup by Buhari/APC led government.

If the Supreme court panel were acting purely on legal terms, why didn't they order the results to be made public so the world can see the so called result and see

Its brazen daylight robbery!!

garfield1:
It was only one judge.6 against 1 and will make no difference.go back to primary school

Dr University Lecturer , how come after tribunal the now counted votes is more than registered votes , more than the accredited votes
and more than the population of the state itself ?

How can u call your self a SAN after your final verdict failed to add up in numbers , u still go on and hit the hammer on it

I must not be learned to know that counted votes are supposed to be lesser than the number of registration cards itself as well as accredited votes too, or does it take 6 judges to know that ?

RuudVanNisteroy:
Imo state House of Assembly composition:
PDP = 13 members
AA = 6 members
APGA = 6 members
APC = Zero
Supreme Court said APC won. What kind of species are imo people. They "massively" voted for APC in Guber election, but voted other parties in HoA elections that took place same day. They must have assumed that we're all stupid, don't they?

Does this make sense to you? APC won the Governorship and on the same people that voted for APC refused to vote for any of their candidates to represent them in the House of Assembly on the same day.

APC have one from Ehime Mbano

nameo:
So the number of accreditated voters increases or changes?

You mean 236,000 persons were not accreditated with card readers but manually and they ALL belonged to only one candidate?

If it was the persons in the 338 units that were accreditated manually, is it that EVERY single voter in those units voted for one candidate?

You guys should fear God!!!

Oga parties are bounded by their pleadings and a court can only accept or reject prayers distilled for determination.the matter before the court was to determine the legality of only hope's hitherto excluded votes and not any other voterls.get it.the only way to get real accredited votes tally is to use voters register and not the card readers

How come even buhari could get close to 30% of Imo states votes while uzodinma's was 15%
Something was off about the gov election in the first place.

garfield1:
Oga parties are bounded by their pleadings and a court can only accept or reject prayers distilled for determination.the matter before the court was to determine the legality of only hope's hitherto excluded votes and not any other voterls.get it.the only way to get real accredited votes tally is to use voters register and not the card readers

You didnt answer my question. Just dancing about.

And NO!! The court cannot "restore" the votes of a particular candidate/party and refuse to "restore" the votes of other candidates in same units in same elections only cos those other candidates didnt seek such determination.

What do some of you chaps think the the judicial process is or works?

Anyways, we await the written reasons for this judgement from their Lordships cos at this point nothing makes sense

Preshy561:
[s][/s]
You write too much gibberish.

To think that the chap is an administrator of this forum says all you need to know...

He can never do any analysis without bringing in his cheap partisan sentiments...

franchasng:
Pls don't let them deceive you.

Listen to me.

Hope Uzodimma forged result with fake INEC result sheet and INEC Returning Officer and Collation Officer stroke it out as fake because other party agents did not even sign the result sheets and only APC and one other party had results on the results sheets out of over 5 candidates, how come

At the election tribunal, this incident was brought up, Tribunal called on INEC to testify and INEC testified that the result sheets were forged and not issued by them INEC, so tribunal nullified Hope Uzodimma's claim.


It went to Appeal Court, the same case was brought up, INEC again testifies the result sheets were forged and the Appeal Court Judge still went further that the result should be called out, and only APC and one other party's result were legible, the person calling the result said he couldn't see other party candidate's results clearly, so he was asked to call out Hopes results and total number of Hope's acclaimed vote exceeded total number of accredited voters and was still not enough to counter Ihedioha's total votes.


So don't let them fool you, this is pure coup by Buhari/APC led government.

If the Supreme court panel were acting purely on legal terms, why didn't they order the results to be made public so the world can see the so called result and see

Its brazen daylight robbery!!

We need to know how based how they acclaimed votes exceeded total number of accredited votes. This is just a joke taken to far.
Be smart if you want to legitimatize fraud and let the maths add up.

garfield1:
Oga parties are bounded by their pleadings and a court can only accept or reject prayers distilled for determination.the matter before the court was to determine the legality of only hope's hitherto excluded votes and not any other voterls.get it.the only way to get real accredited votes tally is to use voters register and not the card readers

You are not adding up!

Are you saying that the Supreme Court was sitting solely to grant Uzodinma's relief without considering the injury that would eventuate to other parties in the case?

We are talking about justice here and this tales by moonlight you are advancing have no place in equity, fairness, logicality, empiricalism and other grundnums of the judicial system.

RuudVanNisteroy:
We need to know how based how they acclaimed votes exceeded total number of accredited votes. This is just a joke taken to far.
Be smart if you want to legitimatize fraud and let the maths add up.

Stop wasting your time trying to piece the puzzle together.

Uzodinma was not popular in Imo State in the run up to the election. It therefore beggars believe where the so-called cancelled/excluded votes emerged from.

I have personally stopped wasting my energy on the charade going on in Nigeria.

It is not worth my time...

maestroferdi:
You are not adding up!

Are you saying that the Supreme Court was sitting solely to grant Uzodinma's relief without considering the injury that would eventuate to other parties in the case?

We are talking about justice here and this tales by moonlight you are advancing have no place in equity, fairness, logicality, empiricalism and other grundnums of the judicial system.

As usual,empty and grandioise noise like ologbobdiyan.ill refer you to
Kakih vs pdp and anor 2010
Doma vs inec
Otti vs ikpeazu 2015
Coca cola vs dangari 2002 per jsc tobi

helinues:
As in, I have also been reasoning it since the judgment was delivered.

Mbaka did not see any visions, he was given an hint earlier

They used him to calm tensions that would have risen from the supreme court judgement

garfield1:
As usual,empty and grandioise noise like ologbobdiyan.ill refer you to
Kakih vs pdp and anor 2010
Doma vs inec
Otti vs ikpeazu 2015
Coca cola vs dangari 2002 per jsc tobi

Dont be ridiculous...

You can do better than trying to evade the issue by the petulant dropping of cases.

Let us know the rationale and precedence used by the justices of the Supreme Court to void the votes of other parties in the purported cancelled polling booths/units while that of Uzodinma was tallied in?

Stop playing hide and seek or better still keep mum if you have no clue...

Wailers may wail to Kingdom come, this case is settled!

INEC is terribly corrupt, I think this INEC chairman conducted one of the most corrupt elections in INEC history

Supreme Court justices are too busy to sort out the mess that INEC created, so they simply focus on facts and evidence provided to them. They know that most, if not all candidates were allowed by INEC to rig the polling stations they can, so they are not going to crack their head with pointless doctorate level mathematics to ensure figures add up.

RuudVanNisteroy:
How on earth will voters that voted 'massively' for APC in the same polling booth in the Governorship election now vote for another party in the House of Assembly election a second later?

How sure are you that inec didnt also remove APC votes from those HOA members

maestroferdi:
Dont be ridiculous...

You can do better than trying to evade the issue by the petulant dropping of cases.

Let us know the rationale and precedence used by the justices of the Supreme Court to void the votes of other parties in the purported cancelled polling booths/units while that of Uzodinma was tallied in?

Stop playing hide and seek or better still keep mum if you have no clue...

This older generation have destroyed the country and the incoming Marlians are not better

garfield1:
THE IMO GUBERNATORIAL JUDGMENT - A PAINFUL BUT LEGALLY CORRECT VERDICT!

It is indeed a perplexing paradox: Hope Uzodinma may not have won the 2019 Imo State gubernatorial election, yet the Supreme Court, on the facts, was right in declaring him the winner of that election in law. The error was not the Supreme Court's, but that of Governor Emeka Ihedioha's legal team; and it was a crucially fatal error.

What happened was this: During the governorship election in Imo State, apparently concocted results, perhaps not having any basis whatsoever in reality, BUT SIGNED BY INEC PRESIDING OFFICERS, were turned in from more than 350 polling units, giving Hope Uzodinma of the APC an incredibly unassailable lead. When those results were transmitted to the wards collation centres, the collation officers, who had no power in law to cancel or reject them, rejected the said polling units results, and refused to collate them, thereby effectively excluding them from the total tally of the governorship result that was eventually declared by the Returning Officer. In the aftermath of the said exclusion, the Independent National Electoral Commission declared Governor Ihedioha the winner of the election.

The exclusion of the results of those polling units was the fulcrum of the petition presented at the Tribunal by Hope Uzodinma. Ever since David Mark V. ABUBAKAR USMAN, and DOMA V. INEC, the law has been settled that neither collation officers nor a returning officer, has the power in law to exclude a polling unit result duly signed by the presiding officer at the polling unit; only the election tribunal possesses the power to cancel or exclude such a result. So, at the point of its presentation, Senator Uzodinma's petition was potentially viable, in spite of the apparent dubiousness of the polling units results on which it was anchored, there being a REBUTTABLE presumption of regularity and correctness, by virtue of both the Electoral Act and Evidence Act, enuring in favour of any result declared by a presiding officer.

The backbreaking and fatal error made by Ihedioha's legal team was not filing a CROSS PETITION fiercely challenging the integrity of the suspect polling units results upon which Uzodinma was relying, and praying the election tribunal to formally nullify the said results. Without a cross petition, none of the grounds under section 138 (1) of the Electoral Act for questioning the elections conducted in those polling units in which Uzodinma "won" could have been competently raised by Governor Ihedioha in his defence to Uzodinma's petition. This was the ratio decidendi of the old Court of Appeal decision in IDRIS V. A.N.P.P.(2008)8 NWLR(PT.1088) Page 1. In the recent Court of Appeal decision in ATIKU ABUBAKAR V. BUHARI, the Court of Appeal again invoked the principle in dismissing Buhari's contention that Atiku ABUBAKAR was born in Cameroun to parents who originally were Camerounians, and thus disqualified from contesting the election. Dismissing the contention, the Court of Appeal held that the issue was incompetent, since Buhari did not file a cross petition.

Ihedioha indeed did set up facts in his Reply to the petition rehashing the serial infractions that led to the exclusion of the results of the said 300 plus polling units. But that was legally not enough, in the absence of a cross petition. Besides, such renditions by a Respondent in a mere Reply or Statement of Defence are clearly incompetent. The reason for the incompetence was was made clear by the Court of Appeal in NATIONAL JUDICIAL COUNCIL & ORS V. HON. JUSTICE JUBRIL BABAJIDE ALADEJANA & ORS(2014) LPELR - 2413 (CA) Page 31, paras C - F, at ratio 3 thus -

"The law is that it is a plaintiff who by his statement of claim primarily nominates issues to be tried in a suit and which he relies on to have the judgment of the Court. For a defendant, it is only necessary to resist the plaintiff's claim on the facts pleaded. It is not for a defendant to set up facts which would convey that it is not just setting up a defence but setting up a new case of his own. He can only do so by way of a counter claim..."

Shorn of the legalese, what the above authority is simply saying is that since the issue nominated for trial by Hope Uzodinma was the unlawfulfulness or otherwise of the exclusion of the results of the 300 plus polling units by the ward collation officers, Ihedioha's defence was therefore necessarily restricted by law to showing that those who excluded the results had the power in law to exclude them. Without a cross petition praying for the nullification of those results, the law forbids Governor Ihedioha as respondent from raising the issue of the alleged serial corrupt practices and irregularities marring the said results, in a mere statement of defence; that was a new issue not nominated by Uzodinma as petitioner. Ihedioha, being a Respondent, could only have competently raised them via a cross petition, being a new issue not nominated by Uzodinma, the petitioner.

Tragically, Ihedioha's legal team forgot to include the pivotal cross petition. And in the absence of a cross petition, the Supreme Court was right in law, painfully though it may seem, to rely on the presumption of regularity and correctness enshrined by both the Electoral Act and Evidence Act in favour of the said results, and to reckon with them and add them up to the final result, since Ihedioha's legal team had woefully failed to effectively attack the results and rebut that presumption. For the Supreme Court, this was the legally correct conclusion to come to, having found that INEC had no power in law to exclude polling units results duly affirmed by the various polling units presiding officers.
Read this anti buharist

I don't know what you mean by not filling cross-petition. Do you mean he should have filed a cross-petition at trial? If so, I don't see the need for that since the tribunal deemed the evidence given by ihedioha and inec enough to grant them victory. Don't forget that the appeal and supreme courts don't take in new evidence so I don't how a cross petition could be entertained at appellate level. That said, it's obvious that the supreme court admitted an evidence rejected by the lower courts in granting Hope his prayers. The reason for that is what we wait for, but I don't think ihedioha's team could have done anything to prevent the supreme court from admitting those evidences. The onus lies with inec who voided the results. While inec claimed the results were bogus, they did not go ahead to sanction the presiding officers of those PUs. This incompetence by inec has become more pronounced since yakub stepped in.

More importantly, it seems the supreme court is saying inec does not have the power to invalidate votes. Now this raises a serious question as INEC have been invalidating votes since.1999. A recent case is that of Osun election where the prayer was for votes voided by inec to be reinstated. Of course we know the supreme court hid under a certain technicality instead of looking at the meat of the matter there. I would also like to know your thinking about this.

RuudVanNisteroy:
This older generation have destroyed the country and the incoming Marlians are not better

"Marlians" in a serious discussion of this nature?

Agboriotejoye:
I don't know what you mean by not filling cross-petition. Do you mean he should have filed a cross-petition at trial? If so, I don't see the need for that since the tribunal deemed the evidence given by ihedioha and inec enough to grant them victory. Don't forget that the appeal and supreme courts don't take in new evidence so I don't how a cross petition could be entertained at appellate level. That said, it's obvious that the supreme court admitted an evidence rejected by the lower courts in granting Hope his prayers. The reason for that is what we wait for, but I don't think ihedioha's team could have done anything to prevent the supreme court from admitting those evidences. The onus lies with inec who voided the results. While inec claimed the results were bogus, they did not go ahead to sanction the presiding officers of those PUs. This incompetence by inec has become more pronounced since yakub stepped in.

More importantly, it seems the supreme court is saying inec does not have the power to invalidate votes. Now this raises a serious question as INEC have been invalidating votes since.1999. A recent case is that of Osun election where the prayer was for votes voided by inec to be reinstated. Of course we know the supreme court hid under a certain technicality instead of looking at the meat of the matter there. I would also like to know your thinking about this.

No,inec has powers to invalidate votes only at the polling unit level by the presiding officers and no other person.secondly one can file cross appeal at any point.buhari filed against atiku at the supreme court,ihedioha filed a cross appeal against uzodinma and nwosu.filling a cross appeal would have really brought the integrity of hops votes to question

maestroferdi:
Dont be ridiculous...

You can do better than trying to evade the issue by the petulant dropping of cases.

Let us know the rationale and precedence used by the justices of the Supreme Court to void the votes of other parties in the purported cancelled polling booths/units while that of Uzodinma was tallied in?

Stop playing hide and seek or better still keep mum if you have no clue...

How can you say i dont have a clue about the whole judgment when o was the first to foresee it? I remember you even attacked me severally.go back to my previous posts and see rationale,am very busy and not ready to entertain your usual insults.

But you dont need to be told that the votes of other parties in the disputed units are insignificant and wont dethrone that of hope and moreover hope was the only one that challenged those results therefore his own takes preeminence.
Talking of precedent,i dont know any yet because almost all election cases are based on electoral malpractices and not incorrect collation hence this.there's always a first time for everything.a calm perusal of the electoral act will show you that the court were trite.moreover,the decision was unanimous and taken on same day of hearing to show you how easy it was.i hope i dont regret indulging you.warm up to hope

franchasng:
Pls don't let them deceive you.

Listen to me.

Hope Uzodimma forged result with fake INEC result sheet and INEC Returning Officer and Collation Officer stroke it out as fake because other party agents did not even sign the result sheets and only APC and one other party had results on the results sheets out of over 5 candidates, how come

At the election tribunal, this incident was brought up, Tribunal called on INEC to testify and INEC testified that the result sheets were forged and not issued by them INEC, so tribunal nullified Hope Uzodimma's claim.


It went to Appeal Court, the same case was brought up, INEC again testifies the result sheets were forged and the Appeal Court Judge still went further that the result should be called out, and only APC and one other party's result were legible, the person calling the result said he couldn't see other party candidate's results clearly, so he was asked to call out Hopes results and total number of Hope's acclaimed vote exceeded total number of accredited voters and was still not enough to counter Ihedioha's total votes.


So don't let them fool you, this is pure coup by Buhari/APC led government.

If the Supreme court panel were acting purely on legal terms, why didn't they order the results to be made public so the world can see the so called result and see

Its brazen daylight robbery!!

You have my utmost respect sir for saying the pure truth and being objective

Somebody was even saying INEC cancelled only Hope’s result, while I have news for them INEC does not have powers under the law to cancel individual candidate results. INEC simply cancelled the whole unit, or ward

Never mind Hope, this country is hopeless!

garfield1:
No,inec has powers to invalidate votes only at the polling unit level by the presiding officers and no other person.secondly one can file cross appeal at any point.buhari filed against atiku at the supreme court,ihedioha filed a cross appeal against uzodinma and nwosu.filling a cross appeal would have really brought the integrity of hops votes to question

Where did you get dat info from that INEC can only void votes only at polling unit? INEC can cancel results from polling units that are not duly signed or where there are evidences of electoral irregularities such as violence and overvoting or vote buying.
I still insist that ihedioha has no reason to file a cross appeal at the supreme court having won at trial and appeal. The supreme court should bring forth their explanation on why they allowed the votes because what we got from trial was that the principal witness could not recognise the polling units' forms when it was presented to him. Besides, only INEC can authenticate a result sheet as they did in atiku's case not presiding officers. So I still don't know how supreme court arrived at the decision to allow those results.

Agboriotejoye:
Where did you get dat info from that INEC can only void votes only at polling unit? INEC can cancel results from polling units that are not duly signed or where there are evidences of electoral irregularities such as violence and overvoting or vote buying.
I still insist that ihedioha has no reason to file a cross appeal at the supreme court having won at trial and appeal. The supreme court should bring forth their explanation on why they allowed the votes because what we got from trial was that the principal witness could not recognise the polling units' forms when it was presented to him. Besides, only INEC can authenticate a result sheet as they did in atiku's case not presiding officers. So I still don't know how supreme court arrived at the decision to allow those results.

The problem with most of you pdp fans is that you are not conversant with the law.according to the electoral act,once results are declared at thr polling units,only the courts can nullify them.please update yourself with the electoral act and stop strezsing us.also,see doma vs inec 2012 and hashidu vs goje 2004.i can send it to you to clear your doubts.these are settled laws.stop bringing your layman reasoning here,we are dealing with legalities.
The presiding officers are part of inec,there are the alpha and omega at polling units in the eyes of the law.