₦airaland Forum

CanadaOrBust:
The onus is on the SC to at least examine the documents (which were the SOLE reason for the judgment) before taking the absolutely extreme step of replacing a seating gov!
You obviously did not read the respondent attorney’s submission that the documents were not even properly signed and were smudgy and incomplete. A simple cursory EXAMINATION would have revealed all that.
Don’t you think that at least that should have been done before rushing ahead to replace a seating governor with the appellant based SOLELY on those same documents which were solely supplied by the appellant himself and which INEC had sworn were not authentic??!!

Dear brother.

The defense lawyers did well in their averment or simply put disagreement (pages 26-32).

And that is all they did well at.

Averment is only verbal and academical in nature. Proves to support their averments is where they terribly failed.

You don't win cases like this without proves.

Uzodinma had one. INEC and Ihedioha didn't.

The only way to dislodge the "fake" is to use the absence of the features on it that are on the "original". Or that are on the fake, but not in the original.

Either way, you need the original to disprove the fake.

INEC and Ihedioha failed to provide the original.

A huge sign of conspiracy.

You would like to pity the responders, but they don't deserve it because they proved nothing.

Conspiracy is clear in all these legal tussles from the tribunal to the appelate court.

Agboriotejoye:
See eehn, the mere fact INEC rejected those results means a re-run should be ordered in those PUs since INEC who are supposed to have the results claim not to have it and are saying those tendered by one of the contestants are false.
What SC is indirectly accusing INEC of doing is colluding with PDP to rig which means INEC should be sanctioned. The problem we have in our legal system is that there is really no accountability for anything.
Just imagine going to court and claiming an oluwole WAEC certificate is genuine. Imagine WAEC comes and says No it's fake. Then the court rules that since WAEC can't produce the genuine one, then oluwole remains genuine. The fact remains that only INEC through its PU officers are empowered to authenticate results just like WAEC.
Allowing anyone else to procure and brandish results without authentication from INEC is opening the gate for fraud to become the norm in our system. The two best options the SC could have done was to call the PU officers to court to authenticate the results in defiance of INEC's position, or to order a rerun.

Any other thing is simply an invitation to anarchy.

Anyone could have influenced INEC to cancel results.

But since INEC is not an island of its own. There are rules guiding how elections are cancelled.

Both INEC and Ihedioha did not say there was no elections in those PUs. They only said the results presented by Uzo for those PUs were fake.

They wanted SC to believe all results were collated and returned based on electoral act.

Accept it or not, INEC's inability to present it's own authentic results was the reason they failed.

Supreme Court would have been partial to order a re-run in a case where it is established that a party deliberately connived with the umpire to maliciously discard votes accrued to the other party.
Page 27-28 of the case before supreme court stated exactly what Uzo asked SC to determine.

SC gave judgement based on the case before it.

I cheer up this judgement. Against what you want but in agreement with the law.

Thumbs up to Supreme Court.

Olaolufred:
Dear brother.

The defense lawyers did well in their averment or simply put disagreement (pages 26-32).

And that is all they did well at.

Averment is only verbal and academical in nature. Proves to support their averments is where they terribly failed.

You don't win cases like this without proves.

Uzodinma had one. INEC and Ihedioha didn't.

The only way to dislodge the "fake" is to use the absence of the features on it that are on the "original". Or that are on the fake, but not in the original.

Either way, you need the original to disprove the fake.

INEC and Ihedioha failed to provide the original.

A huge sign of conspiracy.

You would like to pity the responders, but they don't deserve it because they proved nothing.

Conspiracy is clear in all these legal tussles from the tribunal to the appelate court.

You obviously missed this my post. Here it is again:

[[Simply admit that any unbiased person with any sense of fairness and justice would fault this judgment.

An electoral body swore in court that they never issued certain documents. Not only that, adding figures from said documents would make for funny electoral totals.
YET, without even cursory examination of said documents and based SOLEY on them, the SC promptly replaced a sitting gov with the same man who came up with the said questionable documents and who came FOURTH in said election!]]

Agboriotejoye:
Forget!! Ihedioha is the beneficiary of INEC incompetence. He cannot take them to court. Like I told ur other zombie, INEC under Mahmoud Yakub is darn incompetent and Yakub needs to get the boot!!

That said, from the SC judgment here, the SC relied on the electoral act which presumes that elections held as long as there is no to the contrary to admit the evidence into court negating its earlier stance that to prove that elections did not hold in PUs, you need evidence from PU agents in each PU. In other words, elections are presumed to have held. The question now is what is the evidence to prove that elections did not hold? Incidence forms? No result? Fake result? We can't say as that is left for the court to decide if the evidence you bring before it is enough to conclude whether elections did not truly hold.

However, if INEC, tribunal and appeal court agree that an evidence is defective based on:
1. 366 results are tendered to cover for 388 PUs
2. Only the police and APC have the results
3. The results are not original copies but duplicate with INEC saying it does not have any original copies with them.
4. The results where not signed by INEC's PU agents
5. Only APC and PDP have legible scores in the result while the others are smudgy. How do we even know that Hope scored the highest in those when we can't see the scores of 2nd and 3rd position.
7. INEC the authorizing body for elections declared the results fake.

The SC now says you don't need the originals and of course the duplicate originals do not need to be certified before they can be admitted. Can you imagine that?!! Just as I gave you example of WAEC certificates, what SC has done has opened grounds for proper rigging to begin to take place in party strongholds more than ever before. More importantly, if a result raises so much doubt, is it not safer to reject it than to admit it and open floodgates for other riggers to begin to contemplate carrying out such a far reaching exercise as unseating as sitting governor.

Like I said, just aas you can't rob Uzodinma to pay ihedioha based on INEC's incompetence, you also can't rob Ihedioha to pay Uzodinma based on false results.

Bro.

For Christ's sake,

Has the verbal averment of the defense lawyers proven that Uzo brought in fake results? No.

"I disagreed" isn't same as "I proved"

All your points listed above are averments/disagreements of the defense counsels.

They proved nothing.

1. They had no proof there was no elections.

2. They had no proof elections was cancelled.

3. They had no results to prove the votes they returned.

They only knew one thing "uzo's results were fake"

Please, INEC is disgusting on this matter.

And I respected you to do better than this.

CanadaOrBust:
Simply admit that any unbiased person with any sense of fairness and justice would fault this judgment.

An electoral body swore in court that they never issued certain documents. Not only that, adding figures from said documents would make for funny electoral totals.
YET, without even cursory examination of said documents and based SOLEY on them, the SC promptly replaced a sitting gov by the same man who came up with the said questionable documents and who came FOURTH in said election!

THEY SWORE THEY NEVER ISSUED ANY DOCUMENTS?

ELECTORAL ACT MANDATES INEC TO GIVE COPY OF THE PU RESULTS TO PARTY AGENTS AND POLICE. THIS IS A GUIDELINE TO GUIDE AGAINST MANIPULATION AFTERWARDS.

PDP AND INEC IS EXPECTED TO HAVE A COPY OF SAME RESULTS TO DEFEND THEIR CASE.

BUT THEY BOTH COULDN'T PRESENT THEIR OWN COPIES PRESUMED TO BE ORIGINAL.

IT IS A GRAND-FOULPLAY.

BROTHER, THE REALITY IS STARING US IN THE FACE.

THOUGH WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE BLINDED AGAINST IT.

Olaolufred:
Bro.

For Christ's sake,

Has the verbal averment of the defense lawyers proven that Uzo brought in fake results? No.

"I disagreed" isn't same as "I proved"

All your points listed above are averments/disagreements of the defense counsels.

They proved nothing.

1. They had no proof there was no elections.

2. They had no proof elections was cancelled.

3. They had no results to prove the votes they returned.

They only knew one thing "uzo's results were fake"

Please, INEC is disgusting on this matter.

And I respected you to do better than this.

I am not sure u read what he wrote. The DOCUMENTS presented and right in front of the judges were faulty to the point of uselessness. Yet they did not see that because they refused to examine them, the sole basis for their momentous ruling!

Olaolufred:
Anyone could have influenced INEC to cancel results.

But since INEC is not an island of its own. There are rules guiding how elections are cancelled.

Both INEC and Ihedioha did not say there was no elections in those PUs. They only said the results presented by Uzo for those PUs were fake.

They wanted SC to believe all results were collated and returned based on electoral act.

Accept it or not, INEC's inability to present it's own authentic results was the reason they failed.

Supreme Court would have been partial to order a re-run in a case where it is established that a party deliberately connived with the umpire to maliciously discard votes accrued to the other party.
Page 27-28 of the case before supreme court stated exactly what Uzo asked SC to determine.

SC gave judgement based on the case before it.

I cheer up this judgement. Against what you want but in agreement with the law.

Thumbs up to Supreme Court.

Pray tell how it was established that a party connived with INEC. Did you watch the election collation for Imo? I did and I saw the rigmarole in play there so don't say what you don't know.

Kindly furnish us with the guidelines for cancelling elections in the electoral law. Let's start from there. INEC never said elections did not hold. What they are saying is the results were fake and thus cancelled the elections. The right thing was supposed to be ordering a rerun but of course Yakub is too incompetent.

That being the case, the fact that the evidence tendered by Uzodinma/Police is defective should call for a rerun not o accept it because the electoral act presumes all elections held.

You can't hand over the proceeds of a robbery to another thief just because the original owner has not come forth.

Olaolufred:
Bro.

For Christ's sake,

Has the verbal averment of the defense lawyers proven that Uzo brought in fake results? No.

"I disagreed" isn't same as "I proved"

All your points listed above are averments/disagreements of the defense counsels.

They proved nothing.

1. They had no proof there was no elections.

2. They had no proof elections was cancelled.

3. They had no results to prove the votes they returned.

They only knew one thing "uzo's results were fake"

Please, INEC is disgusting on this matter.

And I respected you to do better than this.

Dude, I like the fact you used the phrase "Uzo's result". That says it all. Mind you, INEC neversaid elections never held. What they said is that the elections were fraudulent and the results cancelled. Therefore, any result coming from there is false and fake. Simple as ABC.

What i'll like to hear is that INEC does not have the power to cancel results. That's when SC can have a point. But we all know INEC have the power to cancel results not so? Therefore, it's trite that they can declare a result fake. Like I said already, let's wait and see. This judgement is going to empower rigging in a way never seen before.

A result not signed by INEC's polling officer, not signed by any party agent and having blurred figures produced by Uzo and Police is seen as gospel, let's get real guy. This is an admission of the right to rig and it will portend a very dangerous lead for us. The beneficiaries will be the police officers and polling officers. If you like vote till tomorrow, the results will be written as they wish and INEC will not be able to do anything about it.

Agboriotejoye:
Dude, I like the fact you used the phrase "Uzo's result". That says it all. Mind you, INEC neversaid elections never held. What they said is that the elections were fraudulent and the results cancelled. Therefore, any result coming from there is false and fake. Simple as ABC.

What i'll like to hear is that INEC does not have the power to cancel results. That's when SC can have a point. But we all know INEC have the power to cancel results not so? Therefore, it's trite that they can declare a result fake. Like I said already, let's wait and see. This judgement is going to empower rigging in a way never seen before.

A result not signed by INEC's polling officer, not signed by any party agent and having blurred figures produced by Uzo and Police is seen as gospel, let's get real guy. This is an admission of the right to rig and it will portend a very dangerous lead for us. The beneficiaries will be the police officers and polling officers. If you like vote till tomorrow, the results will be written as they wish and INEC will not be able to do anything about it.

That succinctly summarizes it. You don’t lightly remove a gov and hand the seat to a person that came fourth. If u must do so make sure the documentary basis for your action are authenticated, collaborated, totally above board and beyond reproach!

Olaolufred:
THEY SWORE THEY NEVER ISSUED ANY DOCUMENTS?

ELECTORAL ACT MANDATES INEC TO GIVE COPY OF THE PU RESULTS TO PARTY AGENTS AND POLICE. THIS IS A GUIDELINE TO GUIDE AGAINST MANIPULATION AFTERWARDS.

PDP AND INEC IS EXPECTED TO HAVE A COPY OF SAME RESULTS TO DEFEND THEIR CASE.

BUT THEY BOTH COULDN'T PRESENT THEIR OWN COPIES PRESUMED TO BE ORIGINAL.

IT IS A GRAND-FOULPLAY.

BROTHER, THE REALITY IS STARING US IN THE FACE.

THOUGH WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE BLINDED AGAINST IT.

BOTTOM LINE - You don’t lightly remove a gov and hand the seat to a person that came fourth. If u must do so make sure the documentary basis for your action are authenticated, collaborated, totally above board, and beyond reproach!
In this case not only do the documents look totally faulty, INEC itself swore they were inauthentic, PLUS, adding figures from them would lead to quite ridiculous electoral totals!

CanadaOrBust:
I am not sure u read what he wrote. The DOCUMENTS presented and right in front of the judges were faulty to the point of uselessness. Yet they did not see that because they refused to examine them, the sole basis for their momentous ruling!

BUT THE DEFENSE TEAMS COULD NOT PROVE THAT THE DOCUMENTS WERE FAULTY TO THE POINT OF USELESSNESS.

THE ONLY WAY TO GET RID OF THE "FAKE" IS TO PRESENT THE "ORIGINAL".

AS SOON AS YOU FAILED TO PRESENT THE ORIGINAL YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO BE IT'S CUSTODIAN, SOMETHING IS TERRIBLY WRONG.

SUPREME COURT DID EXCELLENTLY WELL ON THIS CASE.

Agboriotejoye:
Dude, I like the fact you used the phrase "Uzo's result". That says it all. Mind you, INEC neversaid elections never held. What they said is that the elections were fraudulent and the results cancelled. Therefore, any result coming from there is false and fake. Simple as ABC.

What i'll like to hear is that INEC does not have the power to cancel results. That's when SC can have a point. But we all know INEC have the power to cancel results not so? Therefore, it's trite that they can declare a result fake. Like I said already, let's wait and see. This judgement is going to empower rigging in a way never seen before.

A result not signed by INEC's polling officer, not signed by any party agent and having blurred figures produced by Uzo and Police is seen as gospel, let's get real guy. This is an admission of the right to rig and it will portend a very dangerous lead for us. The beneficiaries will be the police officers and polling officers. If you like vote till tomorrow, the results will be written as they wish and INEC will not be able to do anything about it.

PLEASE, KINDLY READ PAGE 29 TO 32 AS ATTACHED.

IT WILL ANSWER THE LIE YOU TOLD ABOVE THAT RESULTS WERE CANCELLED.

IT WAS CLAIMED NOTHING OF SUCH HAPPENED.

YET INEC WHO IS THE CUSTODIAN OF THE ORIGINAL FAILED TO PROVE ANYTHING.

PLEASE ATTACH YOUR PROOF FROM THE JUDGEMENT TO SUPPORT ELECTION WAS CANCELLED.

THIS INCONSISTENCY IS THE REASON THE CASE WAS LOST.

CanadaOrBust:
BOTTOM LINE - You don’t lightly remove a gov and hand the seat to a person that came fourth. If u must do so make sure the documentary basis for your action are authenticated, collaborated, totally above board, and beyond reproach!
In this case not only do the documents look totally faulty, INEC itself swore they were inauthentic, PLUS, adding figures from them would lead to quite ridiculous electoral totals!

IHEDIOHA WAS FRAUDULENTLY RIGGED IN AS THE SUPREME COURT HAS PROVEN.

IT HAD BEEN PROVEN THAT UZO'S CASE ISN'T DISPROVED BY HIS OPPONENT.

SO HIS PRESENTED RESULTS ARE ADMISSIBLE AND PRESUMED ORIGINAL UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE.

THOSE WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO PROVE IT OTHERWISE DIDN'T PROVE ANYTHING AT ALL.

WITH THE FIGURES SHOWN IN THIS CASE.

CANDIDATE 3 WOULD COME 3RD BEHIND IHEDIOHA.
CANDIDATE 2 (NWOSU) IS NON EXISTENT IN THE EYE OF THE LAW. BECAUSE HE WAS NOT QUALIFIED IN THE FIRST PLACE.
NWOSU ONLY HELP WASTE THE VOTES THAT COULD HAVE BEEN ACRUED TO OTHER CANDIDATES.
I AM NOT HAPPY WITH THE SHODDY JOB INEC DID ON THIS CASE.

Olaolufred:
IHEDIOHA WAS FRAUDULENTLY RIGGED IN AS THE SUPREME COURT HAS PROVEN.

IT HAD BEEN PROVEN THAT UZO'S CASE ISN'T DISPROVED BY HIS OPPONENT.

SO HIS PRESENTED RESULTS ARE ADMISSIBLE AND PRESUMED ORIGINAL UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE.

THOSE WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO PROVE IT OTHERWISE DIDN'T PROVE ANYTHING AT ALL.

WITH THE FIGURES SHOWN IN THIS CASE.

CANDIDATE 3 WOULD COME 3RD BEHIND IHEDIOHA.
CANDIDATE 2 (NWOSU) IS NON EXISTENT IN THE EYE OF THE LAW. BECAUSE HE WAS NOT QUALIFIED IN THE FIRST PLACE.
NWOSU ONLY HELP WASTE THE VOTES THAT COULD HAVE BEEN ACRUED TO OTHER CANDIDATES.
I AM NOT HAPPY WITH THE SHODDY JOB INEC DID ON THIS CASE.

Once again, an electoral body swore in court that certain documents supposedly issued by it were inauthentic. NOT ONLY THAT, the documents themselves truely looked incomplete and inauthentic. NOT ONLY THAT, figures from said documents would make for funny electoral totals.
YET, without even cursory examination of said documents and based SOLEY on them, the SC promptly sacked a sitting gov and replaced him by the man who came up with the said clearly questionable documents and who came FOURTH in said election!

And you see nothing wrong with that??

According to you the only way is for INEC to produce the originals. So from now on the only way INEC can prove they never issued a document is to produce the original. That makes sense to you bah?

CanadaOrBust:
Once again, an electoral body swore in court that certain documents supposedly issued by it were inauthentic. NOT ONLY THAT, the documents themselves truely looked incomplete and inauthentic. NOT ONLY THAT, figures from said documents would make for funny electoral totals.
YET, without even cursory examination of said documents and based SOLEY on them, the SC promptly sacked a sitting gov and replaced him by the man who came up with the said clearly questionable documents and who came FOURTH in said election!

And you see nothing wrong with that??

According to you the only way is for INEC to produce the originals. So from now on the only way INEC can prove they never issued a document is to produce the original. That makes sense to you bah?

I REMEMBERED A CASE OF A SMALL GIRL WHO SAW A STRANGE FACE IN THEIR COMPOUND SOMETIMES AGO. SHE SHOUTED, "THIEF, THEIF". THE MAN SHOUTED ON HER TO SHOT UP. PEOPLE CAME AND ASKED HIM WHAT HE CAME FOR, HE TOLD THEM WHO HE WAS VISITING.
ASKED THE GIRL WHY SHE CALLED HIM THIEF, SHE SAID BECAUSE HE IS A STRANGER.
INEC CALLED A DOCUMENT FAKE.
BY STATUTORY LAW, INEC IS THE CUSTODIAN OF THE ORIGINAL RESULTS, YET THEY COULDN'T PROVIDE IT.
INEC NEEDED TO BE FLOGGED FOR MESSING UP THIS BIG.
CONSPIRACY! CONSPIRACY!!! CONSPIRACY!!!

Olaolufred:
I REMEMBERED A CASE OF A SMALL GIRL WHO SAW A STRANGE FACE IN THEIR COMPOUND SOMETIMES AGO. SHE SHOUTED, "THIEF, THEIF". THE MAN SHOUTED ON HER TO SHOT UP. PEOPLE CAME AND ASKED HIM WHAT HE CAME FOR, HE TOLD THEM WHO HE WAS VISITING.
ASKED THE GIRL WHY SHE CALLED HIM THIEF, SHE SAID BECAUSE HE IS A STRANGER.
INEC CALLED A DOCUMENT FAKE.
BY STATUTORY LAW, INEC IS THE CUSTODIAN OF THE ORIGINAL RESULTS, YET THEY COULDN'T PROVIDE IT.
INEC NEEDED TO BE FLOGGED FOR MESSING UP THIS BIG.
CONSPIRACY! CONSPIRACY!!! CONSPIRACY!!!

Guy,you are really good.kudos.but you are wasting your time.their actual grief and grouse is with the party that won not the judgment

CanadaOrBust:
Once again, an electoral body swore in court that certain documents supposedly issued by it were inauthentic. NOT ONLY THAT, the documents themselves truely looked incomplete and inauthentic. NOT ONLY THAT, figures from said documents would make for funny electoral totals.
YET, without even cursory examination of said documents and based SOLEY on them, the SC promptly sacked a sitting gov and replaced him by the man who came up with the said clearly questionable documents and who came FOURTH in said election!

And you see nothing wrong with that??

According to you the only way is for INEC to produce the originals. So from now on the only way INEC can prove they never issued a document is to produce the original. That makes sense to you bah?

I don't know why you are blindly arguing a judgement whose simplicity can be seen even from space.

The judgement has been delivered and the only 2 sides which stayed on the side of the law were the Supreme Court and hope Uzodinmas counsel.

The counsels of INEC and PDP were monumental flops and legendary móròns.

If you still wish to lament and cry then go ahead but know that tears cannot erase or reverse a Supreme Court Judgement credibly given.

Have a great weekend......HOPEFULLY

Blindersoff:
I don't know why you are blindly arguing a judgement whose simplicity can be seen even from space.

The judgement has been delivered and the only 2 sides which stayed on the side of the law were the Supreme Court and hope Uzodinmas counsel.

The counsels of INEC and PDP were monumental flops and legendary móròns.

If you still wish to lament and cry then go ahead but know that tears cannot erase or reverse a Supreme Court Judgement credibly given.

Have a great weekend......HOPEFULLY

Maybe u missed this:

Any unbiased person with a robust sense of fairness would have a problem with this SC ruling.

BOTTOM LINE - You don’t lightly remove a gov and hand the seat to a person that came fourth in the election. If u must do so make sure the documentary basis for your action are authenticated, collaborated, totally above board, and beyond reproach!
In this case not only do the documents (which are the ONLY basis for the judgment) look totally faulty, INEC itself swore they were inauthentic. PLUS, adding figures from them would make for quite ridiculous electoral totals!

That ought never be the basis for immediate replacement of a gov by a 4th place finisher!

THAT IS THE BOTTOM LINE.

Nice chatting with y’all!

CanadaOrBust:
Maybe u missed this:

Any unbiased person with a robust sense of fairness would have a problem with this SC ruling.

BOTTOM LINE - You don’t lightly remove a gov and hand the seat to a person that came fourth in the election. If u must do so make sure the documentary basis for your action are authenticated, collaborated, totally above board, and beyond reproach!
In this case not only do the documents (which are the ONLY basis for the judgment) look totally faulty, INEC itself swore they were inauthentic. PLUS, adding figures from them would make for quite ridiculous electoral totals!

That ought never be the basis for immediate replacement of a gov by a 4th place finisher!

THAT IS THE BOTTOM LINE.

Nice chatting with y’all!

You can lightly remove a sitting Governor when those meant to defend their crown as the sitting Governor cannot do something as simple as produce evidence to that effect despite being the umpires of same election.

Actio non datur non damnificato

INEC and IHEDIOHA together injured themselves.

Olaolufred:
PLEASE, KINDLY READ PAGE 29 TO 32 AS ATTACHED.

IT WILL ANSWER THE LIE YOU TOLD ABOVE THAT RESULTS WERE CANCELLED.

IT WAS CLAIMED NOTHING OF SUCH HAPPENED.

YET INEC WHO IS THE CUSTODIAN OF THE ORIGINAL FAILED TO PROVE ANYTHING.

PLEASE ATTACH YOUR PROOF FROM THE JUDGEMENT TO SUPPORT ELECTION WAS CANCELLED.

THIS INCONSISTENCY IS THE REASON THE CASE WAS LOST.

Check point e on the last page. No properly conducted election result was rejected. If INEC says an election was not properly conducted and rejected it I don't know what else to call dat

Agboriotejoye:
Check point e on the last page. No properly conducted election result was rejected. If INEC says an election was not properly conducted and rejected it I don't know what else to call dat

I think you should know by now that an election can not be cancelled without proof of why it was cancelled.
Where there's no proof, it can't stand.
If INEC say it is because of anything, it should be established at polling units and incidence forms will prove them out. INEC and Ihedioha failed to prove. But did well to disagree.
God help your people's ignorance.
Anyway, go and challenge it in another court if you wish.
I can't help you.
Neither can Nigeria constitution do.

Agboriotejoye:
Check point e on the last page. No properly conducted election result was rejected. If INEC says an election was not properly conducted and rejected it I don't know what else to call dat

Oga,any allegations of non elections by either parties in court must be proven polling unit by unit

CanadaOrBust:
Once again, an electoral body swore in court that certain documents supposedly issued by it were inauthentic. NOT ONLY THAT, the documents themselves truely looked incomplete and inauthentic. NOT ONLY THAT, figures from said documents would make for funny electoral totals.
YET, without even cursory examination of said documents and based SOLEY on them, the SC promptly sacked a sitting gov and replaced him by the man who came up with the said clearly questionable documents and who came FOURTH in said election!

And you see nothing wrong with that??

According to you the only way is for INEC to produce the originals. So from now on the only way INEC can prove they never issued a document is to produce the original. That makes sense to you bah?

garfield1, Blindersoff, Olaolufred, Agboriotejoye

Something just occurred to me! HOW COULD WE HAVE MISSED THIS?!
Here it is:

SC just handed INEC (and by proxy any ruling party, which is who usually controls INEC) the power to rig any election with impunity. ALL THEY DO IS REFUSE TO PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS OF THE AREAS WHERE THEIR CANDIDATE RIGGED. And just like that their candidate’s fake result sheet must be accepted no matter how outrageous it is! Which means he can become the winner even if he came 10th!!

That will invariably lead to a one-party state!

Unless u can articulate an antidote, that makes this judgment not just bad but quite dangerous!!

[s]

CanadaOrBust:
garfield1, Blindersoff, Olaolufred, Agboriotejoye

Something just occurred to me! HOW COULD WE HAVE MISSED THIS?!
Here it is:

SC just handed INEC (and by proxy any ruling party, which is who usually controls INEC) the power to rig any election with impunity. ALL THEY DO IS REFUSE TO PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS OF THE AREAS WHERE THEIR CANDIDATE RIGGED. And just like that their candidate’s fake result sheet must be accepted no matter how outrageous it is! Which means he can become the winner even if he came 10th!!

That will invariably lead to a one-party state!

Do we now see how this judgment is not just bad but quite dangerous??!!

[/s]

Spewing trash does not make you sensible. Justice cannot be Hoodwinked.

Enough of your senselessness please. Headaches are real

Blindersoff:
[s][/s]

Spewing trash does not make you sensible. Justice cannot be Hoodwinked.

Enough of your senselessness please. Headaches are real

Forget this particular case. Look at the big picture. This is also your country.

WHAT CAN WE DO TO MITIGATE THE PRECEDENT SET BY THIS HORRIBLE JUDGMENT??

CanadaOrBust:
Forget this particular case. Look at the big picture. This is also your country.

WHAT CAN WE DO TO MITIGATE THE PRECEDENT SET BY THIS HORRIBLE JUDGMENT??

You are hell bent on continuing with these your obtuse posts.

The judgement was just and extremely good.

Next time any other litigant would ensure they have all documentation ready even if INEC does not have or refuses to present their own.

There were 3 people involved in this case and not just Uzodinma vs INEC. It was UZODINMA vs INEC/IHEDIOHA so even if INEC refuses to present, IHEDIOHA should have presented and then INEC would be on the hot seat

Justice knows how to balance itself.

Enjoy your Sunday filled with HOPE

garfield1:
Oga,any allegations of non elections by either parties in court must be proven polling unit by unit

INEC said the elections did not meet the standard required not that it did not hold. They then rejected the results. Maybe I should paste the results here for you to see and judge for yourself. The subpoenaed results which the police brought were 366 instead of 388. Inec's polling officer's signatures were missing on them. Only two results were clear on them i.e. PDP/APC. How that result stands is a precursor as I've told you already. The sc by this judgement just opened the door for rigging using the police and polling officers I tell you.

Blindersoff:
You are hell bent on continuing with these your obtuse posts.

The judgement was just and extremely good.

Next time any other litigant would ensure they have all documentation ready even if INEC does not have or refuses to present their own.

There were 3 people involved in this case and not just Uzodinma vs INEC. It was UZODINMA vs INEC/IHEDIOHA so even if INEC refuses to present, IHEDIOHA should have presented and then INEC would be on the hot seat

Justice knows how to balance itself.

Enjoy your Sunday filled with HOPE

Ihedioha did present. It was the one obtained by police subpoena that the supreme court relied on to give judgement. Are you sure you read what you pasted at all

CanadaOrBust:
Forget this particular case. Look at the big picture. This is also your country.

WHAT CAN WE DO TO MITIGATE THE PRECEDENT SET BY THIS HORRIBLE JUDGMENT??

Oh you see, he's not concerned about the precedent or maybe blinded by partisanship to see it. I've used the waec certificate issue as an example and even that olaolufred said if waec can't produce original of oluwole then oluwole becomes genuine. Just imagine!!

I don't blame them though. Even Tanko does not have his full certificate neither does buhari. So to them, certificates are inconveniences that need to be done away with. Just swear by the holy Quran and you're good.

Just wait and see what happens in the next elections with this judgement.

Olaolufred:
I think you should know by now that an election can not be cancelled without proof of why it was cancelled.
Where there's no proof, it can't stand.
If INEC say it is because of anything, it should be established at polling units and incidence forms will prove them out. INEC and Ihedioha failed to prove. But did well to disagree.
God help your people's ignorance.
Anyway, go and challenge it in another court if you wish.
I can't help you.
Neither can Nigeria constitution do.

You're still missing the point. Have you seen the tabulation submitted by Hope? There were some that the number of voters even exceeded the accredited voters. If you need me to paste them here for you I will.
INEC did not get ANY documents from those PUs be it EC8A, incidence forms or anything else. Go back and read the judgement. What else did you expect INEC to do? Accept pink copies from the police? Let's get real here pls.

Modified: There was an INEC official who gave witness and tendered evidence that elections did not hold or were cancelled in some of those PUs. Why was his evidence not considered by sc? Pg 24

Blindersoff:
You are hell bent on continuing with these your obtuse posts.

The judgement was just and extremely good.

Next time any other litigant would ensure they have all documentation ready even if INEC does not have or refuses to present their own.

There were 3 people involved in this case and not just Uzodinma vs INEC. It was UZODINMA vs INEC/IHEDIOHA so even if INEC refuses to present, IHEDIOHA should have presented and then INEC would be on the hot seat

Justice knows how to balance itself.

Enjoy your Sunday filled with HOPE

You don’t understand. Ihedioha/PDP have no documents from those areas because none was issued to them!

Bros, forget about winning this meaningless argument. This is an anonymous, faceless forum.

This is a horrible judgment that sets dangerous precedent. A person that came 10th can easily be declared winner. All they’d do is present result sheets and the Supreme Court MUST accept them no matter how outrageous and defective they may be, as long as no one can produce the originals!
WOW!!!
Just look at what u r supporting in a bid to win a meaningless argument!

Agboriotejoye:
INEC said the elections did not meet the standard required not that it did not hold. They then rejected the results. Maybe I should paste the results here for you to see and judge for yourself. The subpoenaed results which the police brought were 366 instead of 388. Inec's polling officer's signatures were missing on them. Only two results were clear on them i.e. PDP/APC. How that result stands is a precursor as I've told you already. The sc by this judgement just opened the door for rigging using the police and polling officers I tell you.

The door of rigging were opened already by the judgment of 2015 in rivers and akwa ibom.those errors are clearly not fatal according to the apex court