₦airaland Forum

mushystuff:
Yes the court did. The high court already did actually and then the Supreme court affirmed the judgement of the high court while quashing that of the court of appeal.
The court stated clearly that only the issuing authority 9f a certificate has the power to correct or effect name changes if the owner of such certificate claims there was an error or something fundamental was added or removed. He didn't comply with that.

Mis-arrangement is 'ABC'; CAB' for example. Meaning those same names will appear consistently but perhaps not on the same order. In this instance however, you have:
1. Degi Biobragha (First School Leaving Certificate)
2. Adegi Brokumo (WAEC/GCE)
3. Degi Biobarakuma Wanagwa (First Degree)

He then swears affidavits claiming his correct names are:
4. Biobarakuma Degi (9 Aug 2018)
5. Biobarakuma Wanagha Degi Eremienyo (18 Sept 2018)

How much consistency is there to these names? Why would 2 affidavits sworn within 1 month of each other have such differences in names when he isn't a woman that maybe got married and took on her husband's name?

In debates, I always believe there are common grounds between those at the opposite sides of a discourse. So let's agree on one thing first, irregularity of a name and arrangement on certificates is not the same as forgery or falsification. Forgery requires a deliberate intent and not negligence or carelessness where a person fails to complain about the irregularity of his name to WAEC or JAMB or his university. Forgery is not the same as a person as a typical Nigerian is with being careless about the proper and legal procedure.

Can we agree on that for starters?

fergie001:
Let me bring it down...
Leave this grammar..

INEC doesn't have the power to reject a nominated candidate of a political party even if he/she falters in any part of our constitution.. Only the Courts can.
It's well stated in Section 31 of the Electoral Act ammended 2010. So even if was wrong and INEC noticed it, they will do nothing about it.

Don't ever use an affidavit to suffice for any change in your certificate. Only the certification body has that right to correct whatever is wrong on your certificate.
There is nothing like it depends on the institution.
Be it waec, NYSC, neco, FSLC, first degree, masters, PhD whatever...

I repeat only the certification body can do that. Not just an affidavit.

Affidavit is one of the requirements you will take to the certification body to effect the correction but only the certification body...I repeat..only that certification body can make that correction.

Again, so the Supreme Court will begin to read the Registry Act there and probably tell who is a man and a woman. When Degi appeared everywhere, how did Adegi come about?

Why do you think he had two affidavits on same day?
You think he was stupid to do that?

His not naming the Notary Public, you think he was stupid about that?

You are even justifying it for him in your first answer.....what if there was an unnamed Notary Public (does that not give him away already)?

If Degi and Biobarakuma reflects consistently...how did Biobagha come in?

How did Biobakunmo reflect?

Please.

Haba
........EoD...let's give it up already, the man goofed!

The fact the man goofed about legal procedure does not mean he deliberately intended to forge documents.

isthatso:
@ kay17

as for the law on change of name and certificates? I am not a lawyer, you have google you can search for the law which I am sure exists. I Am satisfied based on 2 reasons. Firstly, 5 Supreme Court justices have delivered on the matter of affidavit, even if there was no written law, it has now become the law by this judgement. An affidavit is one of most basic things in law, if 5 Supreme Court justices cannot get what constitutes a valid affidavit, then we are in trouble. Secondly it makes sense to prevent a situation where I just pick up another man’s certificate, swear an affidavit that I am the person on the certificate and benefit from that without the body that issued the certificate corroborating the affidavit..does that make sense to you? It makes sense that I should first swear an affidavit and then go to the body that issued the certificate with the affidavit to issue a corrected certificate. I believe somebody mentioned 2 examples where the same thing happened to him or a known person and he had to go to Waec/ unical with the affidavits to be issued with a fresh certificate.

The Supreme Court works with precedents. Precedents are formed by its previous decisions. And the Supreme Court applies the law and not create it. There is a concept known as consistency of law. It means that the law should be universally applicable in all circumstances even in exceptions. Exceptions themselves often serve the purpose of the general principles. So if the Supreme Court decides that irregularity of names or documents is forgery, then it must accept in every other cases that comes before it.

Kay17:
The fact the man goofed about legal procedure does not mean he deliberately intended to forge documents.

Is ignorance an excuse in the court of law?

fergie001:
Is ignorance an excuse in the court of law?

The law works with facts. The law is found in the law books. The facts are found in documents and in the mouth of witnesses during trial. The question of foregry is within the ambit of facts which the law is applied to. Goofing is not the same with forgery or falsification.

Kay17:
The law works with facts. The law is found in the law books. The facts are found in documents and in the mouth of witnesses during trial. The question of foregry is within the ambit of facts which the law is applied to. Goofing is not the same with forgery or falsification.

Since you didn't answer the question....No P.

You can go on...

Kay17:
The Supreme Court works with precedents. Precedents are formed by its previous decisions. And the Supreme Court applies the law and not create it. There is a concept known as consistency of law. It means that the law should be universally applicable in all circumstances even in exceptions. Exceptions themselves often serve the purpose of the general principles. So if the Supreme Court decides that irregularity of names or documents is forgery, then it must accept in every other cases that comes before it.

The Supreme Court has not said that irregularity of names or documents is a forgery. Again I stress English is a very precise language and I caution we don’t allow emotion to blur our understanding or comprehension of what is being said.

The verdict of forgery is not based on the irregularity of certificates or names alone but the circumstances surrounding the case. You need to read the judgement again paying particular attention starting from page 15 onwards.

Btw it also states there since you mentioned in a previous post that Degi’s lawyers dis not dispute the verdict of a lower court that ruled that an affidavit even if properly sworn cannot change the names on a certificate and that it is the body who issued the certificate that must change it.

isthatso:
The Supreme Court has not said that irregularity of names or documents is a forgery. Again I stress English is a very precise language and I caution we don’t allow emotion to blur our understanding or comprehension of what is being said.

The verdict of forgery is not based on the irregularity of certificates or names alone but the circumstances surrounding the case. You need to read the judgement again paying particular attention starting from page 15 onwards.

Btw it also states there since you mentioned in a previous post that Degi’s lawyers dis not dispute the verdict of a lower court that ruled that an affidavit even if properly sworn cannot change the names on a certificate and that it is the body who issued the certificate that must change it.

Honestly, you and mushystuff have plenty of time.

fergie001:
Since you didn't answer the question....No P.

You can go on...

Ignorance of the law does not apply here because Degi's case is of forgery and not that he he forged his certificates and he argued in defence that he did not know it was a crime or wrong.

Kay17:
Ignorance of the law does not apply here because Degi's case is of forgery and not that he he forged his certificates and he argued in defence that he did not know it was a crime or wrong.

When you don't know it is a crime..what is it called?

Meaning of IGNORANCE.....are you OK now?

isthatso:
1. The Supreme Court has not said that irregularity of names or documents is a forgery. Again I stress English is a very precise language and I caution we don’t allow emotion to blur our understanding or comprehension of what is being said.

2. The verdict of forgery is not based on the irregularity of certificates or names alone but the circumstances surrounding the case. You need to read the judgement again paying particular attention starting from page 15 onwards.

3. Btw it also states there since you mentioned in a previous post that Degi’s lawyers dis not dispute the verdict of a lower court that ruled that an affidavit even if properly sworn cannot change the names on a certificate and that it is the body who issued the certificate that must change it.

1. Thankfully we agree on this.

2. What are the surrounding circumstances which the Supreme Court relied on that proves forgery? Because I have read the relevant portions of the judgment back and forth, and I saw no circumstances justifying its decision of forgery which was not factually proven by signature and handwriting experts.

3. Assuming that is the case, then it is that he had no recognizable certificates at all in the fictional eye of the law but not forgery.

fergie001:
When you don't know it is a crime..what is it called?

Meaning of IGNORANCE.....are you OK now?

Oga, you asked about the ignorance of the law which bars people from claiming ignorance of the law as a defence against m. Not ignorance within its general meaning.

Kay17:
It is shocking that an originating summons was used to determine a fraudulent presentation of information. Besides Nigerians hardly cconcern themselves with how they arrange their names. There was a string of consistency in his name, the arrangement was scattered, accepted, but that does not mean it was fraudulent.

I agree.this case borders on technicalities and a good lawyer will suffice

Kay17:
1. Assuming the declaration of 2018 was invalid because of an unnamed notary public, don't you see some consistency in all the names given by Degi. Aside from the middle name Wangagha, the surname Degi and the name Biobarakuma reflect clearly.

2. Change of name is traditionally in form of declarations on oath and affidavits and sometimes a publication to the general public. Each institution has its rules on what form it accepts. The purpose of declarations and affidavits are to force a person to swear on oath the truth of the representations he is making on the pain of perjury. Therefore taking declarations and affidavits beyond mere utterances.

3. It depends on the institution involved. INEC accepted it. Most institutions are satisfied with affidavits and declarations. Besides aside from the Oaths Act, there is no law, black letter, that states how change of name should be done. And the Supreme Court judgement did not state the legal framework it was relying to say an affidavit did not suffice. It didn't say it drew inspiration from the Constitution or any other statute or case law.

I concur

Kay17:
Oga, you asked about the ignorance of the law which bars people from claiming ignorance of the law as a defence against m. Not ignorance within its general meaning.

So Ignorance now have different meanings?


This is tantamount to wasting the court's time. This court Inter alia has spent time in its earlier learned judgements which is discernable to any English Student.

This judgement isn't trite but is subject to the norms and encumbrances associated therein. Wasting the court's time on this subject is the height of judicial rascality.

This appeal(or review) as you the petitioner might like to call it, is flung out and dismissed.

Parties should bear their costs.

I rise.

CTC SIGNED by SEUN.

ChristianNorth (SAN), mushystuff (SAN), MelesZenawi (SAN), isthatso (SAN)

Dansuqi (SAN), garfield1 (SAN), Kay17 (SAN), Iamgrey5 (SAN)

Dansuqi:
I concur

Hahaha....you go concur tire ..

This Bayelsa pain una ooooo.......the oil money...Kai

Alright...let's make a deal..oya APC.

Come and take Abia and give PDP Ondo agreed?

Kay17:
The Supreme Court works with precedents. Precedents are formed by its previous decisions. And the Supreme Court applies the law and not create it. There is a concept known as consistency of law. It means that the law should be universally applicable in all circumstances even in exceptions. Exceptions themselves often serve the purpose of the general principles. So if the Supreme Court decides that irregularity of names or documents is forgery, then it must accept in every other cases that comes before it.

The supreme court in its rules indirectly has powers to make new laws where there is a lacuna

Kay17:
2. What are the surrounding circumstances which the Supreme Court relied on that proves forgery? Because I have read the relevant portions of the judgment back and forth, and I saw no circumstances justifying its decision of forgery which was not factually proven by signature and handwriting experts.

3. Assuming that is the case, then it is that he had no recognizable certificates at all in the fictional eye of the law but not forgery.

Everything is there. I can’t help you if you cannot see, that’s English, I know no other language than the language in the verdict.


It is for him to prove he is the same person since the allegation is that he is not the same person . Since he failed to prove he is the same person on the certificates, then the court has no option but to deliver a verdict of forgery and fraud. Because by inference he has submitted documents that are not his.. The law is not sentimental, the law deals with facts and evidence. It’s simple logic, you have produced documents in conflicting names and failed to prove they are yours. What do you call a man who produces another mans documents to gain an advantage....a fraudster!!!

He is a fraudster and technically speaking he cannot contest an election again in Nigeria for 10 years. If he wants to clear his name he should do the needful and ask waec and his primary school to change his certificates if indeed they are genuine

fergie001:
Hahaha....you go concur tire ..

This Bayelsa pain una ooooo.......the oil money...Kai

Alright...let's make a deal..oya APC.

Come and take Abia and give PDP Ondo agreed?

Leave me am hungry.have noticed that these archaic electoral laws usually safe failed governors and disappoint the good ones

Dansuqi:
Leave me am hungry.have noticed that these archaic electoral laws usually safe failed governors and disappoint the good ones

It is true...abeg Tanko...can't the Abia judgement be reviewed?

fergie001:
So Ignorance now have different meanings?


This is tantamount to wasting the court's time. This court Inter alia has spent time in its earlier learned judgements which is discernable to any English Student.

This judgement isn't trite but is subject to the norms and encumbrances associated therein. Wasting the court's time on this subject is the height of judicial rascality.

This appeal(or review) as you the petitioner might like to call it, is flung out and dismissed.

Parties should bear their costs.

I rise.

CTC SIGNED by SEUN.

ChristianNorth (SAN), mushystuff (SAN), MelesZenawi (SAN), isthatso (SAN)

Dansuqi (SAN), garfield1 (SAN), Kay17 (SAN), Iamgrey5 (SAN)

He should carry his matter to ecowasland forum, this one pass nairaland

isthatso:
Everything is there. I can’t help you if you cannot see, that’s English, I know no other language than the language in the verdict.


It is for him to prove he is the same person since the allegation is that he is not the same person . Since he failed to prove he is the same person on the certificates, then the court has no option but to deliver a verdict of forgery and fraud. Because by inference he has submitted documents that are not his.. The law is not sentimental, the law deals with facts and evidence. It’s simple logic, you have produced documents in conflicting names and failed to prove they are yours. What do you call a man who produces another mans documents to gain an advantage....a fraudster!!!

He is a fraudster and technically speaking he cannot contest an election again in Nigeria for 10 years. If he wants to clear his name he should do the needful and ask waec and his primary school to change his certificates if indeed they are genuine

Bad laws are like ghosts, they will always haunt you.

isthatso:
He should carry his matter to ecowasland forum, this one pass nairaland

isthatso:
He should carry his matter to ecowasland forum, this one pass nairaland

What is legal about the warped and outrageous views of zenawi

Dansuqi:
What is legal about the warped and outrageous views of zenawi

He is just there nah.....shey you said you are hungry.

Please help us beg Alaibe now.

[s]

isthatso:
Your IQ is so low it does not measure on the scale!

INEC does not Authenticate documents, they screen (which I have defined) and publish the list of candidates and the credentials they claim they have. It is then up to the public to challenge in court or otherwise. In cases where a discrepancy is brought by the public it is sent back to the Party and when found to be true that is when the fine comes in. INEC DOES NOT AUTHENTICATE CREDENTIALS!!

you are so dimwitted and Thick it is unbelievable. I have told you not once not twice in our interactions on Nairaland to go and brush up on your understanding of English language comprehension and I am not joking!!!!! You lack basic comprehension and a serious IQ problem.

The law is what is in the electoral act and the constitution, not what is written in newspapers by journalists many of whom like you use the wrong words. That an article uses the word "verify" in an article does not mean "authenticate" the validity. The constitution is clear, the electoral act is clear. I really dont know if you were dropped on the head as a child!!!!

Look at what happened to a man who just screwed up his destiny 24 hrs before his day because he failed to comprehend English.



Below is the relevant act: If you have any brain you will see that from sub sections 4, 5 and 6, it is only when a member of the public challenges the credentials in the court and succeeds that INEC imposes a fine. INEC does not instigate any Authenticadion or Validation!!


31.-( I) Every political party shall not later than 60 days before the date appointed for a general election under the provisions of this Act, submit to the Commission in the prescribed forms the list of the candidates the party proposes to sponsor at the elections.

(2) The list or information submitted by each candidate shall be accompanied by an Affidavit sworn to by the candidate at the High Court of a State, indicating that he has fulfilled all the constitutional requirements for election into that office.
Electoral Act 2010 No. 6

(3) The Commission shall, within 7 days of the receipt of the personal particulars of the candidate, publish same in the constituency where the candidate intends to contest the election.

(4) A person may apply to the Commission for a copy of nomination form, affidavit and any other document submitted by a candidate at an election and the Commission shalL upon payment of a prescribed fee, issue such person with a certified copy of the documents within 14 days.

(5) A person who has reasonable grounds to believe that any information gi vcn by a candidate in the affidavit or any document submitted by that candidate is false may file a suit at the High Court of a State or Federal High Court against such person seeking a declaration that the information contained in the affidavit is false.

(6) If the Court determines that any of the information contained in the affidavit or any document submitted by that candidate is false, the Court shall issue an order disqualifying the candidate from contesting the election.

(7) A candidate for an election shall, at the time of submitting the prescribed form, furnish the Commission with an identifiable address in the State where he intends to contest the election at which address all documents and court processes from either the Commission or any other person shall be served on him.

( 8 ) A political party which presents to the Commission the name of a candidate who does not meet the qualifications stipulated in this section, commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a maximum fine of N500,000.00.


If you had read the actual law and had an iota of sense, then from sub-section 1, you would have realsied that it is logistically impossible for INEC to authenticate the credentials of thousands of candidates within 60 days therefore it makes sense that INEC not be saddled with that responsibility. If you understand the weight in law an affidavit carries, you will understand that by sub section 2, INEC has legally removed itself from any responsibility to authenticate because you have submitted a court certified legally binding sworn declaration that says the documents are authentic, so what are they authenticating? To authenticate the contents of something already deposed in an affidavit means they dont recognize the court that issued the affidavit! With the affidavit which is a requirement, if it turns out your documents are false, you have committed perjury and thats your headache not INEcs if it ever comes out, they are fake, Inec will point to the affidavit! ...but we all know and it seems now all of nairaland is beginning to know that you dont have any!

I said earlier you will come back arguing, you were given the relevant section of the law, you didnt check, I gave you to links to statements by INEC officials that it is not their job, that didnt give you cause to pause and think, instead you carry on like a buffooon!! I'm done with you!!! I dont have superpowers to fix dumb people!! i feel my IQ dropping the more I engage you!!!

You are making a fool of yourself!!!!

[/s]



Stop posting ignorant and illiterate essays, iNEC screen and verify documents submitted by parties and candidates and I've shown you too many facts to prove it so if you're are still clueless and confused because you lack reading and comprehension skills, that's your problem.

Stop quoting me with your ignorant nonsense.

[s]

NGpatriot:
Stop posting ignorant and illiterate essays, iNEC screen and verify documents submitted by parties and candidates and I've shown you too many facts to prove it so if you're are still clueless and confused because you lack reading and comprehension skills, that's your problem.

Stop quoting me with your ignorant nonsense.

[/s]

fergie001:
For all those who have poured all manner of invectives on a Senior Jurist, Justice Mary Ukaego Peter-Odili (JSC) CFR, and maligned the integrity of learned Jurists that chaired the panel on the ill-fated Lyon/Degi Mandate.

Ecclesiastes 10: 10 said something important “If the iron be blunt, and he does not whet the edge, then must he put to more strength: but wisdom is profitable to direct”..

Unbiased lawyers in the house can help us digest.

Please can you send me a copy of the judgment via email?

Iamgrey5:
I understand your point, but a judge could have easily given another verdict tbh

It's not like the case is extremely solid.

The judgment is based on the discretion of the judge but she chose to resolve the case against the defendant.

This is an electoral tribunal and it's not based on the judge's sole discretion, all 5 judges voted on a decision. Mary Odili didn't have sole discretion.

NGpatriot:
[s][/s]



Stop posting ignorant and illiterate essays, iNEC screen and verify documents submitted by parties and candidates and I've shown you too many facts to prove it so if you're are still clueless and confused because you lack reading and comprehension skills, that's your problem.

Stop quoting me with your ignorant nonsense.

INEC does not verify documents sir. That is the job of the screening committee of the party and the law courts.

Ok

[s]

NGpatriot:
[s]


Stop posting ignorant and illiterate essays, iNEC screen and verify documents submitted by parties and candidates and I've shown you too many facts to prove it so if you're are still clueless and confused because you lack reading and comprehension skills, that's your problem.

Stop quoting me with your ignorant nonsense.

[/s]