₦airaland Forum

emmydeep:
USELESS, UNPRODUCTIVE AND LAZY YORUB@ST@RD.

BUHARI DESTROYING THE ZOO FASTER THAN EXPECTED.

PDP AND ALL CHRISTIANS SHOULD JOIN THE AGITATION FOR GOD'S HOLY COUNTRY BIAFRA. THATS THE ONLY WAY FORWARD

sukkot:
what is it with this masculine face looking woman always announcing her business to the public ? WE DO NOT CARE

tinkinjow:
section 147(6) empowers the President to ratify the
nominees if the Senate fails to confirm them after 21 days of
submission of their names to the Senate.

Not that simple.

My friend stop twisting facts, I'm no lawyer but law to a very large extent is a readable subject.

The constitution did not say if the Senate fails to confirm just like that but if it fails to return the nominee - "....where no return has been received..." that ll imply for whatever reason the senate couldn't communicate its stand on any nominee to the president.

So in the event of a return being made, the nominee stands rejected and the president has no power at all other than send a new nominee. Simple.
Why do I feel u r the one trying to confuse people here.

and on the issue of two consenting senators from a nominee state, whether that actually take place or not, when the senate returns a nominee, it does so as the Senate as a whole and not as two senators, especially where it is not explicitly stated (as i assume) what numbers is required to confirm a nominee.
It ll be difficult to prove in court that a nominee was rejected by two senators except majority of them follow u to court or by signature.

Please understand this, what section 147 (6) says is that, if the senate doesn't reject nor confirm such nominee, the president can go ahead and swear in such nominee. And even if the senate reject such nominee, the president can still re-send such nominee. It doesn't say the nominee stand rejected.