₦airaland Forum

The ghost of this judgement will continue to hunt the perpetrators.

Sanchez01:
The added votes far exceeded the accredited voters count. That is the bone of contention and not how he won. The figures do not add up.

That is not the business of the SC.

Inec is to explain this.

The SC only dealt with the issue in contention and it was not vote count or vote recount

Blindersoff:
Exactly. Since they called it fake then they should produce their own copies.

They could not and this then proves that the one they called fake is actually real because they knew it would not contradict what they already had

All am seeing here is that criminal is trying all possible means to justify thieves and try to creates another type of mathematics where 1+3+7=234! wonderful intact supreme court justices are mathematics guru.

God punish N.B.A, N.J.C, I.N.E.C, N.P.F, A.P.C, P.D.P and F.G

John 11 vs 35

EFISSY wept

Racoon:
Yes he may be detailing but what he posted tells you a lot about the mentality of the people leading Nigeria as a nation.After the fulani CJN as for more sharia inclusion in the secular Nigerian constitution.What do you have to say about that-and you not ashamed of him?

This nko

Blindersoff:
You should know that absolutely nothing you eventually post would contradict such an academic ruling by the Supreme Court.

This ruling was too simple and justifiably ruled

How can it be justifiably ruled if the total number of voters exceeds those accredited to vote? Don't u smell a fish somewhere?

jcross19:
All am seeing here is that criminal is trying all possible means to justify thieves and try to creates another type of mathematics where 1+3+7=234! wonderful intact supreme court justices are mathematics guru.

If anyone claims your wrist watch is fake should he not be able to produce the original of your wrist watch for sake of comparison and assessment?

If he cannot, how then did he arrive at the fact that your wrist watch is fake?

The courts are not the streets where baseless claims are made without contention.

In the courts he who makes a claim must prove his claim

maasoap:
You are the educated illiterate here boy! INEC said that the results sheets didn't belong to it but couldn't bring out the ones that belonged to it. You must have assumed that the judges are mumus. Lol

So wat u re telling me in essence is dat a duplicate result copy was brought forward. INEC claimed it is not theirs and failed to bring forth the original copies which they can easily claimed was damaged during one of d election violence. Den immediately, d court decided dat as a result of dat, d result brought by d other party is valid. Here is a question though, after uzodimma brought the duplicate copy to the court, who supposed to determine if d duplicate copy is legut or not. D court or the issuing body? Better put, weneva dere is an issue of forgery in court, who is called to validate the document, d court or an expert on d document?

drnoel:
How can it be justifiably ruled if the total number of voters exceeds those accredited to vote? Don't u smell a fish somewhere?

My nose is clean and yours must be rotten to smell fishes even when there are none.

The case and ruling were simple.

Omitted results

SC focused on the appeal and delivered justifiably.

I really would like to the know the lawyers that defended Ihedioha.
Those people should be disbarred. Quack lawyers!
The height of incompetence!

Only fools and apc zombies will believe hope uzodimma and supreme fraud. They arranged those documents even before the election, that's why they keep saying that ihedioha is an interim governor, finally they used father Mbaka as their south east mouth piece to assuage people's feelings before releasing their fraudulent and infliated results, Supreme Court has become Supreme Shame.

Read the judgment. It is sound in law and logic. Very sound. Ihedioha‘a Lawyers are not infallible. They alleged Uzodinma results were forged and didn’t prove it. INEC said it had the genuine results results but never presented them in Court. Issues were joined on the exclusion of Uzodinma results and shown by the production of Forms EC8A and B. Issues were not joined on whether elections held at the places from where the excluded results emanated therefore there was no need to call all the polling agents as the Supreme Court had laid down previously. It was sufficient for the policeman who did to tender the results in the light of the dissenting judgment of the lower court. Good job.

lahizak:
So wat u re telling me in essence is dat a duplicate result copy was brought forward. INEC claimed it is not theirs and failed to bring forth the original copies which they can easily claimed was damaged during one of d election violence. Den immediately, d court decided dat as a result of dat, d result brought by d other party is valid. Here is a question though, after uzodimma brought the duplicate copy to the court, who supposed to determine if d duplicate copy is legut or not. D court or the issuing body? Better put, weneva dere is an issue of forgery in court, who is called to validate the document, d court or an expert on d document?

The court but inec failed to bring any expert to scrutinize the documrnt

lahizak:
So wat u re telling me in essence is dat a duplicate result copy was brought forward. INEC claimed it is not theirs and failed to bring forth the original copies which they can easily claimed was damaged during one of d election violence. Den immediately, d court decided dat as a result of dat, d result brought by d other party is valid. Here is a question though, after uzodimma brought the duplicate copy to the court, who supposed to determine if d duplicate copy is legut or not. D court or the issuing body? Better put, weneva dere is an issue of forgery in court, who is called to validate the document, d court or an expert on d document?

The court does not handle forensics.

Experts do and the experts in this case are the supposed owners of the documents submitted by hope. INEC!

They are to prove that the one with Hope was fake but they could not because the originals could not be produced and I can conclude from this alone that they knew hopes documents were not fake and if they had brought theirs out it would not contradict that of hope so they just decided to put up a very weak defence perhaps because they had already been paid by PDP to try and discredit the result but never knew Uzodinma would push the case as far as he did.

The SC was the litmus test that revealed their agenda

garfield1:
This nko

Guess that is the Supreme court score board for Hope Uzodinma? Displaying a disputed election vote figures on a bill board-Stupidity elevated to unimaginable level.

Blindersoff:
You should know that absolutely nothing you eventually post would contradict such an academic ruling by the Supreme Court.

This ruling was too simple and justifiably ruled

tell us ur academic understanding from the whole judgment.

garfield1:
The court but inec failed to bring any expert to scrutinize the documrnt

INEC themselves are d expert. If INEC cannot successfully defend a document that belongs to them or not. Den wat d heck is dere function in the country?

Blindersoff:
The thread is not about Fulani but about a Court ruling. You broke the rules

Are you a lawyer?
Who made you a judge here?
My post is connected to same atrocities Buhari is committing in Nigeria.

OBku4:

I really would like to the know the lawyers that defended Ihedioha.
Those people should be disbarred. Quack lawyers!
The height of incompetence!

Actually, I believe they did not take Uzodima's appeal serious considering that he was 4th on the declared result. They only focused on Uche Nwosu and AA's appeal.

Their eyes only opened after the tribunal and started question why someone who is 4th should appeal the election of Ihedioha based on geographical spread and why Uzodima did not join appeal with Nwosu and Ararume.

PDP and Ihedioha are only playing of our collective tribal and religious sentiments.... They already knew Ihedioha was a goner after the appeal court ruling on 19th Nov, 2019.

garfield1:
This nko

lol

oga I worked as an inec ad hoc staff during that election and the massive crowd that came out to vote that day surpasses the above figure u posted


are you talking about one community in ahiazu mbaise or the total accredited people in the whole LGA ur figure is fake as they could be how can an LGA with over 170,000 people produce only 9+thousand vote

Mashallah:
Are you a lawyer?
Who made you a judge here?
My post is connected to same atrocities Buhari is committing in Nigeria.

The thread is not about Buhari but about the SC and Imo judgement. Get some sense at least

RareDiamond:
Nawa for this ridiculously unjust judgement by the Supreme Court. This judicial rascality must stop.

Still on the Supreme Court ruling on Imo Guber Election: (Why the Supreme Court must reverse itself)

The law is settled as decided by the same Supreme Court in Buhari v. INEC (2008); that "weight can hardly be attached to a document tendered in evidence by a witness who cannot or is not in a position to answer questions on the document. One of such persons the law identifies is the one who did not make the document. Such a person is adjudged in the eyes of the law as ignorant of the content of the document”.

Questions for the CJN, Justice Tanko and other Supreme Court Justices:

1. Does the Supreme Court have powers to formulate and allocate votes as election results?

2. Were the said results certified by INEC as required by law?

3. Did Hope Uzodinma call 388 witnesses from the 388 polling units to speak to the results to obviate the principle of dumping which the Supreme Court used against the PDP and her candidate, Atiku Abubarka, in the last Presidential Appeal.

4. Were the presiding officers and or party agents of the 388 polling units called to testify by Uzodinma/APC, who were the Petitioners?

5. What are the figures from each of the various 388 polling units generated and allocated to Hope Uzodinma/APC by the Supreme Court?

6. Is the Supreme Court saying that all the votes from the alleged 388 polling units were for the APC alone in an election that was contested by over 70 candidates?

I wanted to respond to your questions one after the other but I later realise it will amount to academic exercise . Here are a few answers to your question if u actually comprehend the judgement .let me start by asking a few question that nailed pdp

1. Did election hold in those pulling units?
2. Did pdp ever complained about any issue regarding those pulling units?
3. Did Inec deploy men and machine to those pulling units?
4.where security men present in that pulling unit?

To answer this question

Election actually took place in those pulling unit
Pdp didn't complain about any issues regarding those pulling units
Inec deployed men and machine
The police got a copy of the result sheet which was tender to confirm uzodinma claim

If you said uzodinma claim is fake then present us with the authentic result ,pdp and Inec couldn't provide any of this and you are here calling this judgement ridiculous? Court doesn't grant you relief you didn't seek for because they are not father Xmas. I expected ihedioha to present or compel Inec to now present to the court the real result since that presented by uzodinma is fake...They 've no answer to this and as a result is the duty of court to ensure justice is done...supreme court did justice ...if you don't like it , petition God....He won't even listen to people bribing Inec to unlawfully exclude result in area where a candidate has comparative advantage

Urchman200:
tell us ur academic understanding from the whole judgment.

I already did. Check my post after the judgment

ezegold4we:
Only fools and apc zombies will believe hope uzodimma and supreme fraud. They arranged those documents even before the election, that's why they keep saying that ihedioha is an interim governor, finally they used father Mbaka as their south east mouth piece to assuage people's feelings before releasing their fraudulent and infliated results, Supreme Court has become Supreme Shame.

You could be right about arranging the documents before elections... But the court does not act based on hearsay, All INEC's council could have done is to present the real results of the said polling units.

Blindersoff:
The thread is not about Buhari but about the SC and Imo judgement. Get some sense at least

The injustice is connected to Buhari.
You that have sense and trying to avoid writing about Buhari's/APC role are a hypocrite

RareDiamond:
Nawa for this ridiculously unjust judgement by the Supreme Court. This judicial rascality must stop.

Still on the Supreme Court ruling on Imo Guber Election: (Why the Supreme Court must reverse itself)

The law is settled as decided by the same Supreme Court in Buhari v. INEC (2008); that "weight can hardly be attached to a document tendered in evidence by a witness who cannot or is not in a position to answer questions on the document. One of such persons the law identifies is the one who did not make the document. Such a person is adjudged in the eyes of the law as ignorant of the content of the document”.

Questions for the CJN, Justice Tanko and other Supreme Court Justices:

1. Does the Supreme Court have powers to formulate and allocate votes as election results?

2. Were the said results certified by INEC as required by law?

3. Did Hope Uzodinma call 388 witnesses from the 388 polling units to speak to the results to obviate the principle of dumping which the Supreme Court used against the PDP and her candidate, Atiku Abubarka, in the last Presidential Appeal.

4. Were the presiding officers and or party agents of the 388 polling units called to testify by Uzodinma/APC, who were the Petitioners?

5. What are the figures from each of the various 388 polling units generated and allocated to Hope Uzodinma/APC by the Supreme Court?

6. Is the Supreme Court saying that all the votes from the alleged 388 polling units were for the APC alone in an election that was contested by over 70 candidates?

You are not grounded in law. All these your questions can only be relevant if INEC and Ihedioha lawyers contested against results tendered.

Blindersoff:
If anyone claims your wrist watch is fake should he not be able to produce the original of your wrist watch for sake of comparison and assessment?

If he cannot, how then did he arrive at the fact that your wrist watch is fake?

The courts are not the streets where baseless claims are made without contention.

In the courts he who makes a claim must prove his claim

if the results are true then everything need to add up but that's not case here , to tell you that it's fraudulent .