₦airaland Forum

zoedew:
That is not before the court. See, in law and in court Judges and the parties are bound by what is filed in court. The law is then applied to the facts proved from what is filed and you have the output commonly known as judgment. That is it Sir. Ihedioha and INEC in fact said no election held at the 388 unit and that the results were a fraud but provided no proof of those assertions. In law it is the person who says a thing that has the burden to prove it. To say the results tendered by Uzodinma is a fraud is a criminal allegation which must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. Ihedioha legal team made a tactical error in saying so because it is near impossible to prove. In my view better to simply say no elections held and depend on INEC to show none indeed held! Meanwhile INEC further made a mess of the tasteless broth when in the same breath it said it had the genuine results but did not produce it! In the circumstances the Supreme Court could not have decided that case differently than it did. I pity the Supreme Court Judges who can’t say anything in defence of themselves except to watch their names pilloried and scandalised by folks who could be better informed. Matters are made worse when Lawyers who are expected to speak up to protect the integrity and sanctity of the Supreme Court are in conspiratorial silence or say things to mislead non Lawyers.

Government magic they can use any element and also give 200 reason.

Breaking…Rt.Hon. Emeka Ihedioha Returns To Supreme Court.

Former Gov. Emeka Ihedioha has gone back to the supreme court seeking to be returned as the Governor of Imo State, he approached the Apex Court on thursday based on the following reasons..

1. Uzodinma was not APC candidate & was not a candidate of any party in the 9th March Governorship election in Imo State based on the judgement of the same Supreme Court on 20th December 2019.

2. Uche Nwosu was declared as the rightful candidate of APC & AA and was disqualified for double candidature.

3. APC couldn’t have produced 2 candidates in one election.

4. Supreme Court have no powers to allocate votes to any candidate.

5. Supreme Court have no power to increase the number of people accredited by INEC.

6. Somebody that was not a candidate cannot be winner of an election he was not a candidate.

7. Nigerian Police have no powers to
organize elections in Nigeria.

8. Results tendered by a police officer cannot be admitted in any court as exhibit as he was not INEC officer.

Based on the above facts that are still subsisting Ihedioha & PDP have applied for review & he might return to his office as the elected Governor of Imo State.

berrystunn:
Government magic they can use any element and also give 200 reason.

Breaking…Rt.Hon. Emeka Ihedioha Returns To Supreme Court.

Former Gov. Emeka Ihedioha has gone back to the supreme court seeking to be returned as the Governor of Imo State, he approached the Apex Court on thursday based on the following reasons..

1. Uzodinma was not APC candidate & was not a candidate of any party in the 9th March Governorship election in Imo State based on the judgement of the same Supreme Court on 20th December 2019.

2. Uche Nwosu was declared as the rightful candidate of APC & AA and was disqualified for double candidature.

3. APC couldn’t have produced 2 candidates in one election.

4. Supreme Court have no powers to allocate votes to any candidate.

5. Supreme Court have no power to increase the number of people accredited by INEC.

6. Somebody that was not a candidate cannot be winner of an election he was not a candidate.

7. Nigerian Police have no powers to
organize elections in Nigeria.

8. Results tendered by a police officer cannot be admitted in any court as exhibit as he was not INEC officer.

Based on the above facts that are still subsisting Ihedioha & PDP have applied for review & he might return to his office as the elected Governor of Imo State.

zoedew, bluefilm
allthingsgood, adanny01, Neoteny, Basher8583, Kpoikpoi, Staro
Iamgrey5, Yusman316
berrystunn, HRMK, Yusman316, secureprime, ChoCho54
Jack500, xpmode, alaira
solmusdesigns

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’D 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!!

CanadaOrBust:
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’D 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!!

My dear stop blabbing. It's not only inec that has duty of producing evidence. It's actually the duty of the party alleging irregularity. U can't claim that an election was improper without producing any evidence to that effect. Pdp did not produce any evidence other than mere allegation! Supreme decision is very sound

allthingsgood:
My dear stop blabbing. It's not only inec that has duty of producing evidence. It's actually the duty of the party alleging irregularity. U can't claim that an election was improper without producing any evidence to that effect. Pdp did not produce any evidence other than mere allegation! Supreme decision is very sound

My brother, LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE! Forget about this particular case! This is your country’s future we are talking about!

This is a horrible judgment that sets dangerous precedent. A person that came 10th can easily be declared winner and IMMEDIATELY sworn into office.
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!!!

That is what you are supporting in a bid to win a meaningless argument on a faceless, anonymous forum!!

Can’t you see that the SC has a duty to EXAMINE the appellant’s documents and decide wether they are up to par and wether the figures therein make sense vis-a- vis number of registered and accredited voters??!!

CanadaOrBust:
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’D 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!!

Bullseye!
Non-lawyers probably miss that. Lawyers already saw that and more!Since it is an impartial arbiter The Supreme Court in all the circumstances could not but decide the matter the way it did. I have this funny but yet unsubstantiated feeling that INEC deliberately played down its response to the petition for obvious reasons.

zoedew:
Bullseye!
Non-lawyers probably miss that. Lawyers already saw that and more!Since it is an impartial arbiter The Supreme Court in all the circumstances could not but decide the matter the way it did. I have this funny but yet unsubstantiated feeling that INEC deliberately played down its response to the petition for obvious reasons.

Not just INEC, SC acted like part of the conspiracy.

They pretended not to see what is right in front of them! Don’t u think the SC has a duty to EXAMINE the appellant’s documents and decide wether they are up to par and wether the figures therein make sense vis-a- vis number of registered and accredited voters??!!

berrystunn:
Government magic they can use any element and also give 200 reason.

Breaking…Rt.Hon. Emeka Ihedioha Returns To Supreme Court.

Former Gov. Emeka Ihedioha has gone back to the supreme court seeking to be returned as the Governor of Imo State, he approached the Apex Court on thursday based on the following reasons..

1. Uzodinma was not APC candidate & was not a candidate of any party in the 9th March Governorship election in Imo State based on the judgement of the same Supreme Court on 20th December 2019.

2. Uche Nwosu was declared as the rightful candidate of APC & AA and was disqualified for double candidature.

3. APC couldn’t have produced 2 candidates in one election.

4. Supreme Court have no powers to allocate votes to any candidate.

5. Supreme Court have no power to increase the number of people accredited by INEC.

6. Somebody that was not a candidate cannot be winner of an election he was not a candidate.

7. Nigerian Police have no powers to
organize elections in Nigeria.

8. Results tendered by a police officer cannot be admitted in any court as exhibit as he was not INEC officer.

Based on the above facts that are still subsisting Ihedioha & PDP have applied for review & he might return to his office as the elected Governor of Imo State.

Waste of precious judicial time. Cases are decided based on the pleadings by the parties. On the pleadings as they are The Supreme Court will do no such review not to talk of asking that Ihedioha be returned. The Apex Court revisits principle of laws but not in the manner suggested by this piece. The Counsel puts his practice licence on the line in filing such suit if truly one was filed.

berrystunn:
Government magic they can use any element and also give 200 reason.

Breaking…Rt.Hon. Emeka Ihedioha Returns To Supreme Court.

Former Gov. Emeka Ihedioha has gone back to the supreme court seeking to be returned as the Governor of Imo State, he approached the Apex Court on thursday based on the following reasons..

1. Uzodinma was not APC candidate & was not a candidate of any party in the 9th March Governorship election in Imo State based on the judgement of the same Supreme Court on 20th December 2019.

2. Uche Nwosu was declared as the rightful candidate of APC & AA and was disqualified for double candidature.

3. APC couldn’t have produced 2 candidates in one election.

4. Supreme Court have no powers to allocate votes to any candidate.

5. Supreme Court have no power to increase the number of people accredited by INEC.

6. Somebody that was not a candidate cannot be winner of an election he was not a candidate.

7. Nigerian Police have no powers to
organize elections in Nigeria.

8. Results tendered by a police officer cannot be admitted in any court as exhibit as he was not INEC officer.

Based on the above facts that are still subsisting Ihedioha & PDP have applied for review & he might return to his office as the elected Governor of Imo State.

Supreme Court decision is final and can never be overturned. Were they sleeping when they were at the supreme Court trials? One wonders how these pdp people think with their heads

CanadaOrBust:
Not just INEC, SC acted like part of the conspiracy.

They pretended not to see what is right in front of them! Don’t u think the SC has a duty to EXAMINE the appellant’s documents and decide wether they are up to par and wether the figures therein make sense vis-a- vis number of registered and accredited voters??!!

No Sir! The duty of the court is to act on documents presented before it and proved. Uzodinma presented a result sheet. Ihedioha and INEC did not do what in law is required to discredit the results sheet. In law it is taken as proved. Justice to Ihedioha should also be justice to Uzodinma. The Supreme Court will be stepping into the ring and doing injustice to Uzodinma by doing Ihedioha and INEC job for them. The law is that there must be an end to litigation!

zoedew:
No Sir! The duty of the court is to act on documents presented before it and proved. Uzodinma presented a result sheet. Ihedioha and INEC did not do what in law is required to discredit the results sheet. In law it is taken as proved. Justice to Ihedioha should also be justice to Uzodinma. The Supreme Court will be stepping into the ring and doing injustice to Uzodinma by doing Ihedioha and INEC job for them. The law is that there must be an end to litigation!

So it makes sense to you that if a candidate presents documents showing he won more votes than there are registered voters, the SC must accept them AND order him sworn into office IMMEDIATELY, so as not to be accused of “stepping into the ring”.! Law is said to be very technical but this is pure absurdity

Basher8583:
Supreme Court decision is final and can never be overturned. Were they sleeping when they were at the supreme Court trials? One wonders how these pdp people think with their heads

See below Supreme Court so confused because of the confusion in our dead institutions .

zoedew:
Waste of precious judicial time. Cases are decided based on the pleadings by the parties. On the pleadings as they are The Supreme Court will do no such review not to talk of asking that Ihedioha be returned. The Apex Court revisits principle of laws but not in the manner suggested by this piece. The Counsel puts his practice licence on the line in filing such suit if truly one was filed.

What's the answer?
This is what Supreme Court is facing, what ever they choose they will give you reasons

CanadaOrBust:
So it makes sense to you that if a candidate presents documents showing he won more votes than there are registered voters, the SC must accept them AND order him sworn into office IMMEDIATELY, so as not to be accused of “stepping into the ring”.! Law is said to be very technical but this is pure absurdity

You still don’t get it Sir! It is the duty of the Ihedioha and INEC to prove that! Besides, Election Petitions are in a class of their own being cases that have a time frame within which they must be decided. They can’t go on forever. Ihedioha and INEC are bound by their stated cases before the court and it is their duty to prove it.

zoedew:
You still don’t get it Sir! It is the duty of the Ihedioha and INEC to prove that! Besides, Election Petitions are in a class of their own being cases that have a time frame within which they must be decided. They can’t go on forever. Ihedioha and INEC are bound by their stated cases before the court and it is their duty to prove it.

No sir, u r the one that don’t get it. This case hits at the very core of what type of country we’d end up becoming.

NO MATTER WHAT, the SC has a duty to make sure that such a momentous decision has solid, unassailable documentary basis?! They start doing that by thoroughly examining the documents in front of them! This is also their country and they ought care they are setting a precedent that can gradually make it a one-party state! They are removing a gov and putting in another based solely on a set of documents. Regardless of what anyone else fails to submit, they have a DUTY to EXAMINE those documents to make sure they are up to par and that the figures therein make sense vis-a-vis number of registered and accredited voters. That, or they are setting a precedent that will gradually slide the country into a one-party state!

CanadaOrBust:
My brother, LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE! Forget about this particular case! This is your country’s future we are talking about!

This is a horrible judgment that sets dangerous precedent. A person that came 10th can easily be declared winner and IMMEDIATELY sworn into office.
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!!!

That is what you are supporting in a bid to win a meaningless argument on a faceless, anonymous forum!!

Can’t you see that the SC has a duty to EXAMINE the appellant’s documents and decide wether they are up to par and wether the figures therein make sense vis-a- vis number of registered and accredited voters??!!

You are just blabbing unnecessary emotional sentiments that are unfounded. The courts don't work with emotional sentiments. Law is law, not what u wish it to be.

allthingsgood:
You are just blabbing unnecessary emotional sentiments that are unfounded. The courts don't work with emotional sentiments. Law is law, not what u wish it to be.

Law may be law but cases like this are different. They hit at the very core of what type of country we’d end up becoming.

NO MATTER WHAT, the SC has a duty to make sure that such a momentous decision has solid, unassailable documentary basis?! They start doing that by thoroughly examining the documents in front of them! This is also their country and they ought care they are setting a precedent that can gradually make it a one-party state! They are removing a gov and putting in another based solely on a set of documents. Regardless of what anyone else fails to submit, they have a DUTY to EXAMINE those documents to make sure they are up to par and that the figures therein make sense vis-a-vis number of registered and accredited voters. That, or they are setting a precedent that will gradually slide the country into a one-party state!

CanadaOrBust:
8. Results tendered by a police officer cannot be admitted in any court as exhibit as he was not INEC officer.

The police were also stakholders in election, they also received a copy of all election result

CanadaOrBust:
No sir, u r the one that don’t get it. This case hits at the very core of what type of country we’d end up becoming.

NO MATTER WHAT, the SC has a duty to make sure that such a momentous decision has solid, unassailable documentary basis?! They start doing that by thoroughly examining the documents in front of them! This is also their country and they ought care they are setting a precedent that can gradually make it a one-party state! They are removing a gov and putting in another based solely on a set of documents. Regardless of what anyone else fails to submit, they have a DUTY to EXAMINE those documents to make sure they are up to par and that the figures therein make sense vis-a-vis number of registered and accredited voters. That, or they are setting a precedent that will gradually slide the country into a one-party state!

You are not talking Law Sir! We are talking Law here. Courts do Justice according to Law which overtime has become fairly objective by reason of caselaw precedents and not sentiments which is subjective.

zoedew:
You are not talking Law Sir! We are talking Law here. Courts do Justice according to Law which overtime has become fairly objective by reason of caselaw precedents and not sentiments which is subjective.

That’s the whole point sir - PRECEDENT.
The SC behavior here is unprecedented - which is why it sets a dangerous precedent all by itself.

Mention another instance in Nigerian judicial history where the SC ruled against all lower courts AND INEC itself in other to immediately replace a seating governor with an appellant- all based on clearly questionable, uncollaborated, and unauthenticated documents supplied solely by the plaintiff himself!!

The DOCUMENTS presented and right in front of the judges were faulty almost to the point of uselessness. Yet they did not see that because they didn’t want to - they refused to examine the documents, the sole basis for their momentous ruling!

CanadaOrBust:
That’s the whole point sir - PRECEDENT.
The SC behavior here is unprecedented - which is why it sets a dangerous precedent all by itself.

Mention another instance in Nigerian judicial history where the SC ruled against all lower courts AND INEC itself in other to immediately replace a seating governor with an appellant- all based on clearly questionable, uncollaborated, and unauthenticated documents supplied solely by the plaintiff himself!!

The DOCUMENTS presented and right in front of the judges were faulty almost to the point of uselessness. Yet they did not see that because they didn’t want to - they refused to examine the documents, the sole basis for their momentous ruling!

You should have an intellectually rewarding time dissecting and critiquing the judgment in the company of erudite Professors of Law in the Ivory Tower! So long Amigo!

zoedew:
You should have an intellectually rewarding time dissecting and critiquing the judgment in the company of erudite Professors of Law in the Ivory Tower! So long Amigo!

QED
Nice chatting witcha

CanadaOrBust:
That’s the whole point sir - PRECEDENT.
The SC behavior here is unprecedented - which is why it sets a dangerous precedent all by itself.

Mention another instance in Nigerian judicial history where the SC ruled against all lower courts AND INEC itself in other to immediately replace a seating governor with an appellant- all based on clearly questionable, uncollaborated, and unauthenticated documents supplied solely by the plaintiff himself!!

The DOCUMENTS presented and right in front of the judges were faulty almost to the point of uselessness. Yet they did not see that because they didn’t want to - they refused to examine the documents, the sole basis for their momentous ruling!

See ajasin vs omoboriowo 1983 per jsc sowemimo.that is a classical example.
Accepted,they were errors therein the documents but the court considered them as minor errors that will not affect the declaration of hope in the long run and i agree.mind you,election results are presumed regular and correct except rebutted and inec failed to do so.our law recognises that they will always be irregularities or errors in our electioneering process that is why it clearly emphasized "substantial non-compliance" and in this case,the non compliance was not substantial.

Now,the supreme court is a review court esp in election cases.they mostly look at what the judges stated about the different evidences presented at the trial and compare it with the law to see if it is in accordance.they dont go deep in examining pieces of evidence one by one,its the job of the tribunal.from the lower court judgment,they didnt fault the result itself or spotted any error in the result sheets.i dont think they even examined the results,they simply used technicalities to dismiss the case.this flimsy excuse were set aside by the apex court and since the lower court found no fault with the result,the apex court followed suit.

Now,to make it easier for you,ill like you to go to inec office and apply to get a copy of filled result sheets and in most of them,you will spot a lot of errors.it is normal except to laymen like you.
In summary,inec and police brought duplicates which had the same figures,inec had none.pdp none and you still expect the apex court to support inec? Mind you whenever there is dispute or discrepancies in results,the tie breaker is the one presented by the police as the court treats it very seriously.
See uchendu vs inec 2018

CanadaOrBust:
Law may be law but cases like this are different. They hit at the very core of what type of country we’d end up becoming.

NO MATTER WHAT, the SC has a duty to make sure that such a momentous decision has solid, unassailable documentary basis?! They start doing that by thoroughly examining the documents in front of them! This is also their country and they ought care they are setting a precedent that can gradually make it a one-party state! They are removing a gov and putting in another based solely on a set of documents. Regardless of what anyone else fails to submit, they have a DUTY to EXAMINE those documents to make sure they are up to par and that the figures therein make sense vis-a-vis number of registered and accredited voters. That, or they are setting a precedent that will gradually slide the country into a one-party state!

Keep blabbing. Imo has moved on

garfield1:
See ajasin vs omoboriowo 1983 per jsc sowemimo.that is a classical example.
Accepted,they were errors therein the documents but the court considered them as minor errors that will not affect the declaration of hope in the long run and i agree.mind you,election results are presumed regular and correct except rebutted and inec failed to do so.our law recognises that they will always be irregularities or errors in our electioneering process that is why it clearly emphasized "substantial non-compliance" and in this case,the non compliance was not substantial.

Now,the supreme court is a review court esp in election cases.they mostly look at what the judges stated about the different evidences presented at the trial and compare it with the law to see if it is in accordance.they dont go deep in examining pieces of evidence one by one,its the job of the tribunal.from the lower court judgment,they didnt fault the result itself or spotted any error in the result sheets.i dont think they even examined the results,they simply used technicalities to dismiss the case.this flimsy excuse were set aside by the apex court and since the lower court found no fault with the result,the apex court followed suit.

Now,to make it easier for you,ill like you to go to inec office and apply to get a copy of filled result sheets and in most of them,you will spot a lot of errors.it is normal except to laymen like you.
In summary,inec and police brought duplicates which had the same figures,inec had none.pdp none and you still expect the apex court to support inec? Mind you whenever there is dispute or discrepancies in results,the tie breaker is the one presented by the police as the court treats it very seriously.
See uchendu vs inec 2018

Are u being intentionally dishonest or is it that u don’t know the details of ”ajasin vs omoboriowo“? In that case SC upheld the lower courts. Not only that, there is hardly a comparison between the two scenarios. Here is a Guardian report (note the bolded):

”On 16th of August, 1983, Akin Omoboriowo was declared winner by the Federal Electoral Commission (FEDECO).

The impact of the declaration was immediate as allegations of vote rigging using “federal might” ensured that violence erupted in various parts of Ondo state. Some reports claimed that the outbreak of violence was the worst in the history of post-independence Yorubaland, exceeding according to at least one newspaper, the “Wet è” riots of the 1960s.

The Oyo Police Commissioner, Umaru Omolowo, who was in charge of security, announced that at least 40 people were killed in Ondo, including two NPN congressional candidates, Olaiya Fagbamigbe and Kunle Agunbiade, who were set ablaze, according to Omolowo, by an angry mob...

The whole thing was challenged in court, and a panel of five judges of the Federal High Court sitting in Akure reversed the election results and awarded victory to Ajasin. The case was appealed by Omoboriowo, and four of the five Court of Appeal judges that sat in Benin City returned a verdict in Ajasin’s favour. At the Supreme Court, only one judge, Ayo Irikefe, dissented, and so Adekunle Ajasin was declared governor of Ondo state for a second term.“

So the challenge stands:

Mention another instance in Nigerian judicial history where the SC ruled against all lower courts AND INEC itself in order to immediately replace a seating governor with a 4th-place finisher - all based on clearly questionable, uncollaborated, and unauthenticated documents supplied solely by the plaintiff himself!!

Don’t even limit it to only Nigeria. Mention any authentic democracy where that happened!

Also here is just a fraction of erros in the documents you say are minor!
*Only APC signed the documents
*Of the 70 parties only APC and PDP results were legible
* Documents were incomplete
* Smudges and alterations

allthingsgood:
Keep blabbing. Imo has moved on

Look at this one. We are talking of the future of his country and he is stuck on Imo state!

CanadaOrBust:
Look at this one. We are talking of the future of his country and he is stuck on Imo state!

Thot u are a biaflan

CanadaOrBust:
Are u being intentionally dishonest or is it that u don’t know the details of ”ajasin vs omoboriowo“? In that case SC upheld the lower courts. Not only that, there is hardly a comparison between the two scenarios. Here is a Guardian report (note the bolded):

”On 16th of August, 1983, Akin Omoboriowo was declared winner by the Federal Electoral Commission (FEDECO).

The impact of the declaration was immediate as allegations of vote rigging using “federal might” ensured that violence erupted in various parts of Ondo state. Some reports claimed that the outbreak of violence was the worst in the history of post-independence Yorubaland, exceeding according to at least one newspaper, the “Wet è” riots of the 1960s.

The Oyo Police Commissioner, Umaru Omolowo, who was in charge of security, announced that at least 40 people were killed in Ondo, including two NPN congressional candidates, Olaiya Fagbamigbe and Kunle Agunbiade, who were set ablaze, according to Omolowo, by an angry mob...

The whole thing was challenged in court, and a panel of five judges of the Federal High Court sitting in Akure reversed the election results and awarded victory to Ajasin. The case was appealed by Omoboriowo, and four of the five Court of Appeal judges that sat in Benin City returned a verdict in Ajasin’s favour. At the Supreme Court, only one judge, Ayo Irikefe, dissented, and so Adekunle Ajasin was declared governor of Ondo state for a second term.“

So the challenge stands:

Mention another instance in Nigerian judicial history where the SC ruled against all lower courts AND INEC itself in order to immediately replace a seating governor with a 4th-place finisher - all based on clearly questionable, uncollaborated, and unauthenticated documents supplied solely by the plaintiff himself!!

Don’t even limit it to only Nigeria. Mention any authentic democracy where that happened!

Also here is just a fraction of erros in the documents you say are minor!
*Only APC signed the documents
*Of the 70 parties only APC and PDP results were legible
* Documents were incomplete
* Smudges and alterations

I regret replying you big time.is this his you debate? Are you okay ? You are totally impossible.upon all the explanations i have given concerning errors and how the courts work,you are still stubbornly persisting.an sure you are simeone that doesn't listen to useful advice.you are a paid agent of ihedioha.even if all the supreme court justices invite you and explain to you,you wont still agree.dont try this physically please.i pity people around you.shift jor

garfield1:
I regret replying you big time.is this his you debate? Are you okay ? You are totally impossible.upon all the explanations i have given concerning errors and how the courts work,you are still stubbornly persisting.an sure you are simeone that doesn't listen to useful advice.you are a paid agent of ihedioha.even if all the supreme court justices invite you and explain to you,you wont still agree.dont try this physically please.i pity people around you.shift jor

I am totally unbiased. I neither know nor like Ihedioha nor am I from anywhere near Imo state.
See, if this were just another case u might have a point. A case like this is different - it strikes at the very core of what type of country we’d end up becoming. This is not a case u decide on technicalities or pretending not to see what is right in front of you. In Bush vs. Gore Supreme Court not only thoroughly examined the documents, they ordered a recount of the actual original votes!

NO MATTER WHAT, the SC has a duty to make sure that such a momentous, seismic decision has solid, unassailable documentary basis?! They start doing that by thoroughly examining the documents in front of them! This is also their country and they ought care they are setting a precedent that can gradually make it a one-party state! They are removing a gov and replacing him with a fourth-place finishing appellant based solely on a set of uncollaborated documents supplied solely by the appellant. Regardless of what anyone else fails to submit, they have a DUTY to EXAMINE those documents to make sure they are up to par and that the figures therein make sense vis-a-vis number of registered and accredited voters. That, or they are setting a precedent that will gradually slide the country into a one-party state!

zoedew, bluefilm
allthingsgood, adanny01, Neoteny, Basher8583, Kpoikpoi, Staro
Iamgrey5, Yusman316
berrystunn, HRMK, Yusman316, secureprime, ChoCho54
Jack500, xpmode, alaira
solmusdesigns

This judgment is even worse than thought. Guardian obtained a copy of Uzodinma’s appeal. Read it below. This is the SOLE basis for prompt replacement of a sitting governor with a 4th-place finisher! This is the judgment some people are spending sleepless nights defending as great.
YOU PEOPLE SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES!


“The Guardian obtained a certified-true-copy of the record of the appeal filed at the Supreme Court by Uzodinma and APC... which shows that there were mathematical and factual inconsistencies which the apex court ignored.

In the records tendered at the tribunal, Uzodinma, from pages 9 to 27 of his petition, drew a table of votes allocation which he claimed were the figures obtained from the duplicate copies of Forms EC8A handed over to his party agents at the 388 polling units, the results of which were excluded in the overall result of the election.

From the table he compiled from the 388 polling units, there were 252,452 registered voters, out of which 213,695 voted for APC, and 1,903 voted for Ihedioha.

But the table does not indicate either the total number of accredited voters or the number of invalid votes, if any, and the votes allocated to the remaining 68 candidates that contested the election, aside from Uzodinma and Ihedioha.

Also, the duplicate Forms EC8A tendered by the PW54, Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), Rabiu Hussein, showed that there were no fewer than six polling units where more votes were recorded above the registered number of voters.

For instance, on figure number 69 which shows votes cast at Eziama/Okpala (Umualum Village Square, Eziama), the total number of registered voters was 492, whereas the table shows that the APC scored 819 votes and PDP scored 7 votes, meaning that 334 more votes than the registered voters were recorded, apart from the votes polled by the other candidates at the election that were not shown on the table.

Similarly, on page 22 of the petition referencing polling unit 282, the number of registered voters was put at 591, whereas the tabulation shows that APC polled 586 votes and PDP nine votes, indicating a total of four votes higher than the registered number of voters. This, again, excluded the votes scored by the other candidates.

On the same page 22 of the record, at the polling unit 285 (Obudi/Aro, Central Assembly Square, Unusable 11) with 449 registered voters, APC was credited with 780 votes and PDP with four votes, leaving a total of 335 votes higher than the actual number of registered voters.

Figures obtained from page 79 of the record of appeal under item 384 show that APC scored 526 votes, while PDP was credited with two votes, and the total votes cast was put at 526, indicating two votes higher than the total number registered voters in the area.”

CanadaOrBust:
This judgment is even worse than thought. Guardian obtained a copy of Uzodinma’s appeal. Read it below. This is the SOLE basis for prompt replacement of a sitting governor with a 4th-place finisher! This is the judgment some people are spending sleepless nights defending as great.
YOU PEOPLE SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES!


“The Guardian obtained a certified-true-copy of the record of the appeal filed at the Supreme Court by Uzodinma and APC... which shows that there were mathematical and factual inconsistencies which the apex court ignored.

In the records tendered at the tribunal, Uzodinma, from pages 9 to 27 of his petition, drew a table of votes allocation which he claimed were the figures obtained from the duplicate copies of Forms EC8A handed over to his party agents at the 388 polling units, the results of which were excluded in the overall result of the election.

From the table he compiled from the 388 polling units, there were 252,452 registered voters, out of which 213,695 voted for APC, and 1,903 voted for Ihedioha.

But the table does not indicate either the total number of accredited voters or the number of invalid votes, if any, and the votes allocated to the remaining 68 candidates that contested the election, aside from Uzodinma and Ihedioha.

Also, the duplicate Forms EC8A tendered by the PW54, Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), Rabiu Hussein, showed that there were no fewer than six polling units where more votes were recorded above the registered number of voters.

For instance, on figure number 69 which shows votes cast at Eziama/Okpala (Umualum Village Square, Eziama), the total number of registered voters was 492, whereas the table shows that the APC scored 819 votes and PDP scored 7 votes, meaning that 334 more votes than the registered voters were recorded, apart from the votes polled by the other candidates at the election that were not shown on the table.

Similarly, on page 22 of the petition referencing polling unit 282, the number of registered voters was put at 591, whereas the tabulation shows that APC polled 586 votes and PDP nine votes, indicating a total of four votes higher than the registered number of voters. This, again, excluded the votes scored by the other candidates.

On the same page 22 of the record, at the polling unit 285 (Obudi/Aro, Central Assembly Square, Unusable 11) with 449 registered voters, APC was credited with 780 votes and PDP with four votes, leaving a total of 335 votes higher than the actual number of registered voters.

Figures obtained from page 79 of the record of appeal under item 384 show that APC scored 526 votes, while PDP was credited with two votes, and the total votes cast was put at 526, indicating two votes higher than the total number registered voters in the area.”

Supreme Court is confused as below question and answer

CanadaOrBust:
This judgment is even worse than thought. Guardian obtained a copy of Uzodinma’s appeal. Read it below. This is the SOLE basis for prompt replacement of a sitting governor with a 4th-place finisher! This is the judgment some people are spending sleepless nights defending as great.
YOU PEOPLE SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES!


“The Guardian obtained a certified-true-copy of the record of the appeal filed at the Supreme Court by Uzodinma and APC... which shows that there were mathematical and factual inconsistencies which the apex court ignored.

In the records tendered at the tribunal, Uzodinma, from pages 9 to 27 of his petition, drew a table of votes allocation which he claimed were the figures obtained from the duplicate copies of Forms EC8A handed over to his party agents at the 388 polling units, the results of which were excluded in the overall result of the election.

From the table he compiled from the 388 polling units, there were 252,452 registered voters, out of which 213,695 voted for APC, and 1,903 voted for Ihedioha.

But the table does not indicate either the total number of accredited voters or the number of invalid votes, if any, and the votes allocated to the remaining 68 candidates that contested the election, aside from Uzodinma and Ihedioha.

Also, the duplicate Forms EC8A tendered by the PW54, Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), Rabiu Hussein, showed that there were no fewer than six polling units where more votes were recorded above the registered number of voters.

For instance, on figure number 69 which shows votes cast at Eziama/Okpala (Umualum Village Square, Eziama), the total number of registered voters was 492, whereas the table shows that the APC scored 819 votes and PDP scored 7 votes, meaning that 334 more votes than the registered voters were recorded, apart from the votes polled by the other candidates at the election that were not shown on the table.

Similarly, on page 22 of the petition referencing polling unit 282, the number of registered voters was put at 591, whereas the tabulation shows that APC polled 586 votes and PDP nine votes, indicating a total of four votes higher than the registered number of voters. This, again, excluded the votes scored by the other candidates.

On the same page 22 of the record, at the polling unit 285 (Obudi/Aro, Central Assembly Square, Unusable 11) with 449 registered voters, APC was credited with 780 votes and PDP with four votes, leaving a total of 335 votes higher than the actual number of registered voters.

Figures obtained from page 79 of the record of appeal under item 384 show that APC scored 526 votes, while PDP was credited with two votes, and the total votes cast was put at 526, indicating two votes higher than the total number registered voters in the area.”

I stopped reading at the bolded assuming what follows will be as u reasonable as the bolded.

When you are a party to an election, what you concern yourself is your votes. What concerns you is that your party's votes are entered correctly and transmitted intact to the Ward, LG and state collation centres.

Number of accredited voters is a data that belongs to INEC which is used to checkmate electoral fraud.

When the court asked INEC and Ihedioha's lawyers to prove that the result brought by Uzodinma was fake, they should have raised that point with facts. Bring card readers for such PU's to proof all you are trying to say. But the lawyers didn't provide anything. They didn't provide one single evidence.

You are bring this fact to Nairaland, are those lawyers fools that they didn't bring those facts to the court?

The truth is, what is most important is that fraud was committed with evidence, the defense had no proof that fraud was not committed.

Lastly, the court in judgement adopted the entire results Uzodinma brought since there was no evidence against it. Any inconsistencies with the result is INEC's responsibility. It was proven that a large part of votes were unaccounted for, that is ehat you should focus on.

All your issues are petty and misleading.