₦airaland Forum

garfield1:
Wole has buried obi

Omoawoke:
Only those in the SE think he is fraud.
Tinubu won the election hands down.

You guys are clowns, you want to impose a 3rd position candidate that did not meet 25% in up to 25 states to become president.
You guys are so delusional beyond repair

seunmsg:
This thread is about why Wole Olanipekun quoted Awolowo vs Shagari instead of Osun state judgement and you supported the OP. Since Wole quoted Awolowo vs Shagari in his argument regarding the FCT case, tell us where Supreme Court addressed 25% in FCT in the Osun matter or in any other case previously decided.

garfield1:
You are contradicting yourself.olanipekun defense is unassailable,obi team won't have answer to that.irev is critical in the absence of form ec8a but in this case,it's over for obi

emerged01:
Hmm,his defense was poor for his level? Na judge go decide that one o. If you are a lawyer you should know that,me I no be lawyer but i meet am for house.

garfield1:
And when irev is in dispute,you bring agent or police copies

garfield1:
Irev is still secondary, physical results are primary

emerged01:
Ignored by a SAN? If you think so,then he intentionally did it for a reason best known to him. That's what I'm saying. A lawyer that wins over the other lawyer shows he understands the technicality of law better. Nothing else o.

seunmsg:
Can you point me to where the 2023 Osun election judgement addressed the issue of 25% in FCT?

emerged01:
I believe the issue is you recommending a case that should be sited to back the case to prove INEC right. Isnt that a trap?

emerged01:
People dont know anything about law. I laugh when I see a layman talking about law. A lawyer spent 6yrs while studying law you that read english is forming for 4yrs "I too know"
Technicality of law is beyond layman's knowledge. Citing a case of 1979 maybe a trap in this case.

tinsel:
What efforts did the petitioner made to tackle the issue if Rivers? You want the defense to open up in areas the petitioner failed?

Roland17:
Nwanne, is this confirmed?

OriOko88:
Ur mumuism is legendry

garfield1:
The intendment of the framers is what will matter not what is written

garfield1:
Good.after they case,he will come for obi surely

garfield1:
No,I never said so.theres no need to even bring any evidence as the judges have made their minds already

A001:
I hope the Oyomesi appoints a prominent Isese practitioner from the royal family as the next Alaafin. Sadly, they'd up appointing either a Muslim or a Christian to hold one of the most prestigious titles in Yorubaland.

This is a prime example that shows slavery and colonialism in Africa never really ended but just changed form.

I don't know what business an African has on the throne as a king if they must promote foreign cultures (Islam and Christianity), which are evil and harmful to Africa as these cultures seek to erase the African native cultures and traditions.

garfield1:
On every other angle.the judges will settle fct matter and obi won't benefit

garfield1:
It is not 50 50.if you look closely at the history of the courts, various rulings and body language there's no way they would rule in favour of the status quo

garfield1:
So winning his mandate is by discrediting tinubu in the media instead of showing how he won

garfield1:
You have started with your lies and misinterpretation.i never argued about written address,you are the one arguing.you claimed new facts and new issues would be brought during the address and I told you it is not true that it will be baeed on what happened at the proceedings

garfield1:
I thought he came to win his mandate back

DeLaRue:
No, it isn't and can't be 'gone' just because the petitioners 'push'.

A party to a case can push his line of argument, but it is for the court to interprete the Constitution.

Interpretation of the Constitution is not like proving a fact where the court is to a large extent relying on lawyers for the parties. The constitution reserves the power of Interpretation to the court. Lawyers can only seek to persuade the court.

I also don't believe the 25% issue is substantially challenging. In my view, there's less than a 5% chance that the court will adopt a literal interpretation as that is unlikely to reflect the intention of the makers of the Constitution.

I suspect that is why the President 's lawyers did not waste too much time on it. It's fairly simple.

Thomasankara:
[/color]you wan start wahala[color=#770077]😆😆😆😆

garfield1:
He messed obi up

garfield1:
Obi's entire petition was just to discredit tinubu,nothing more

garfield1:
Obi team failed to show how results were manipulated.obi team brought nothing on FCT since they know they won't benefit

seanfer:
Don’t forget that the petitioners didn’t make efforts to convince the court about the result manipulations in Rivers, Benue, Imo and Lagos. All they do is dump results sheets on the floor of the court.