₦airaland Forum

AlphaT1:
I wasn't speaking particularly about this case, I was disputing your assertion that Supreme Court Justices don't take bribe.

senatordave1:
My barrister,you are too much.who are you? You are a future SAN if you are actually a lawyer.you really did justice to the suit and matter at hand objectively.please,i would like you to comment more on this forum when such legal issues arise.thank you for the legal and intellectual expose.
As for johnny,ignore him.am used to him and his limited knowledge built in childish sentiments.

Johnnyessence:
please don't speak for the supreme court OK. let the supreme court judges decide on the case. now they are 7 panel members now. what the people want is justice on the case.

Johnnyessence:
yes it's over to supreme court of justice to decide on the case.

Drbabalola:
I Have Keen Interest In This Matter Because I'm Native Of Osun Who Believes In Equity, Fairness And Justice, Though I Could Appear Partisan Atimes. But I Have Never Been A Bigot And Would Never Be. With Dr Ikpeazu's Mistake Do You Think That Case Can Stand Legal Scrutiny? Are You Sure Those Judges Sincerely Accepted Ikpeazu's Apology? Who Amongst The Two Warring Sides Actually Presented Good Argument(s)? Will Supreme Court Not Throw The Appeal Away Owing To Technicalities. I Want Sincere Answers Based On What You Observed In The Procession. I Was So Busy I Couldn't Follow It. Thanks In Anticipation.

Johnnyessence:
Infact the supreme court of justice will first of all rule on the preliminary objection challenging the suit.

Johnnyessence:
Our appeal is solidly on ground even after initial technical
exchanges. Technical issues like documentation are routine
matters which counsels and courts resolved.The substantive appeal has been adopted and judgement reserved till 5th of July.

kemmylove101:
Post the link pls

Johnnyessence:
Should the judiciary, on the basis of an alleged bias that
is neither actual nor apparent but merely contrived,
disqualify an upright man who has served admirably in
the temple of justice for over forty years? Should a judge
who has served meritoriously on the Bench for twenty-
five years be subjected to caustic and malicious
persecution on phantom allegations of unsubstantiated
bias?
Nigerian politicians now seem to have a new stock-in-
trade: the politically-motivated smearing of judges with
the aim of ‘forum-shopping’. Forum-shopping is that
expression known in legal circles as referring to a litigant’s
attempt to determine (or, at least, have influence on) the
choice of the particular court or judge that will adjudge his
case. Every sane legal system discourages, and in some
cases, punishes forum-shopping.
Observers have watched with great concern and alarm,
the recent trend in Nigeria by which politicians attempt to
effectively ‘forum-shop’ by disqualifying certain judges on
the basis of politically-motivated smears and contrived or
outlandish conjectures. Of course, if a judge has
demonstrably substantial interest in a matter, he should
not sit in judgement over this. But to seek out to smear
and, by so doing, effectively disqualify judges on the basis
of the affiliation of their relatives with certain political
parties, or on the basis of their assumed loyalty to tribal
sentiments, or on the basis of their perceived loyalty to
political leaders from their states of origin, borders on the
ridiculous, reeks of desperation, and should not only be
discouraged but condemned in the strongest terms
possible.
I am motivated to put pen to paper on this matter because
of the appalling opinions and sentiments that have been
expressed regarding the selection of the Supreme Court
panel put together to hear the appeal emanating from the
Court of Appeal’s decision on the Osun State election
petition brought by the candidate of the Peoples
Democratic Party in that election, Senator Ademola
Adeleke. The most vitriolic smears have been directed at
Justice Olabode Rhodes-Vivour (CFR), the impeccable
justice of the Supreme Court, who has a pristine record as
a brilliant, capable, and fair-minded judge. Every unbiased
legal practitioner in Nigeria worth his salt would readily
attest to Justice Rhodes-Vivour’s sagacity, brilliance, and
earned reputation for courage and forthrightness. It is thus
sad and disheartening that unfounded aspersions are now
being cast on this widely-admired jurist.
While one should rightly feel concerned for the eminent
jurist, the greater concern should be reserved for the
implications of these conducts on the health and integrity
of our systems and institutions. We all must rise as a
people to denounce and abort the efforts of politicians
who attack judges for political gains for the following
reasons, among others:
a. Such attacks will further erode confidence in our
institutions in general and in the legal system in particular;
b. Such gradual erosion of confidence will have long term
and far-reaching devastating effects on the cohesion of
the nation, the effectiveness of our institutions and,
indeed, the survival of our democracy;
c. Politically-motivated attacks on judges and the resulting
erosion of confidence in the judiciary will allow political
disputes of a legal character to fester and remain
unresolved. This could be dangerous in a country as
diverse and as susceptible to violent eruptions as ours;
and
d. Our judiciary will be starved of the best of legal minds
who will not want to be subjected to such unwarranted
mudslinging and embarrassing falsehoods.
Of course, allegations of bias should be taken seriously.
The fundamental principle underlying the concept of
judicial bias is that a man may not be a judge in his own
case. To this end, there are two recognised types of bias:
actual bias and apparent bias. There will be actual bias
where the judge is a party to the litigation or has a
financial or other interests in its outcome. The interest
does not have to be pecuniary or proprietary but can
involve the promotion of a cause. Apparent bias may be
alleged where the judge’s conduct or behaviour, interests
or allegiances give rise to a suspicion that he is not
impartial.
In the case of Justice Olabode Rhodes-Vivour (CFR), the
bias alleged so far by innuendoes on social media is
neither actual nor apparent. At best, it may be described
as contrived and, at worst, as phantom. The 68-year-old
justice of the Supreme Court who started his career in the
Lagos State Ministry of Justice and was appointed a judge
in the Lagos State Judiciary in 1994 has, throughout his
illustrious career, exhibited exceptional devotion to duties
and established an unimpeachable reputation for candour,
both of which have stood him in good stead, so much that
his nominations and subsequent appointment to the Court
of Appeal and later to the Supreme Court were greeted
with widespread acceptance in legal circles. There has
never been a proven allegation of impropriety against this
eminent judge and his staunchest detractors have been
unable to credibly fault the legal and logical validity of his
judgements and opinions.
Where does this leave us? Should the judiciary, on the
basis of an alleged bias that is neither actual nor apparent
but merely contrived, disqualify an upright man who has
served admirably in the temple of justice for over forty
years? Should a judge who has served meritoriously on
the Bench for twenty-five years be subjected to caustic
and malicious persecution on phantom allegations of
unsubstantiated bias? And, if we are now going to
recognise unsubstantiated and contrived bias as a new
nebulous class of actionable bias, is it not a concern that
we will soon run out judges to hear and determine
disputes because any litigant would then be able to, out of
thin air, contrive bias against any judge?
Is that where we are headed? Is that where we should be
heading?



https://thenigerialawyer.com/stopping-the-aspersions-being-cast-on-rhodes-vivour-by-akingbolade-akinbobola/

Johnnyessence:
I have been saying it times without number that the mistake has been corrected, Infact Dr. Ikpeazu has addresed the press on that. watch it on youtube.

PassiveNaira:
If you like your MTN network click Like
Click share if you don't like MTN

Johnnyessence:
which law are you speaking here. you are not speaking any law. you are very biased in your analysis. no wonder you keep saying that you don't belong to any political party. funny nairalander. it's hyprocrite nairalander that do behave that way. you will see them jumping from one thread to another pertaining Apc. Abegi jare.

Johnnyessence:
your hyprocrisy stinks. as far as am, and concerned Nigerians will reason with me that 16 years of pdp government is more preferable than the clueless change lifeless buhari government that only knows about his act behavior in government. Abeg when will he appoint his ministers?

Johnnyessence:
I didn't see that in your response at all. you are highly biased. alot of nairalanders reading knows that you are very biased. keep your honesty to yourself and not here that you are biased.

kemmylove101:
[bWow this is eye opener. I never knew all this oo and i am here supporting the igbo for presidency whereas they have been the cause of nigeria's problem.
Please kindly make a thread about this so the younger gerneration can read and know the truth.
History need to be told.
Thanks.
[/b]

Johnnyessence:
you are highly partisan, no wonder you said you don't belong to any political party but you love to comment more on Apc topics, Abeg stop displaying your ignorance here. ejimatic have said it all. he spoke with his conscience. I could remember when he do comment on tribunal and appeal court period. he's now speaking from his conscience. unlike you that is highly biased here in your resply.

Johnnyessence:
OK Don hear you post wole olanipekun response today. post it here a few let us read. once again God bless Dr. Ikpeazu for his submission today.

Johnnyessence:
Hmmm stop displaying your hyprocrisy here. you aren't any member of any political party but you are jumping from one political thread to another commenting, seriously your hyprocrisy is beyond redemption. how can you be saying that you are not a politician but you love to comment on political topics here. I guess you are hypocrite no doubt.

livelymatilda:
Claptrap....Hope you get paid always for posting tharsh online Morning, Afternoon and Night. If not, sorry for you..

livelymatilda:
Claptrap....Hope you get paid always for posting tharsh online Morning, Afternoon and Night. If not, sorry for you..

Johnnyessence:
Apc member with their lies and propaganda you have been bursted already. no lifeline again to lie. go and ask lie Mohammed. distinguished senator Ademola Adeleke is in Nigeria since 2 weeks ago. he arrived Nigeria since 2 weeks ago. so stop peddling your lies and propaganda on social media OK. you can google it .

Johnnyessence:
funny nairalander, I guess you are the judge that will precide on the case on July 5, you are very funny ooooooo. besides you guys never raise the eligibility case in the court today, I guess the APC members that went to court cos' of Ademola Adeleke has paid 3m naira they owed Ademola Adeleke in the appeal court judgement against the eligibility case. God bless Ikpeazu submissions for today. I will inform you here that the Lord justices in the supreme court will never do short cut in their judgement, they will start from the tribunal judgement.

Johnnyessence:
As if you are the judge in the case. continue with your propaganda. God Dr. Ikpeazu for his submission of his address today. the 4 appeal was heavily loaded with the supreme court deciding on the case. he started with tribunal judgement and it shows vividly that he succeed in his submission today. I don't even see Apc saying that distinguish senator Ademola Adeleke isn't qualified for the governorship seat. I guess last month appeal court judgement on the Adeleke eligibility has put an end to their lies and propaganda. God bless Dr. Ikpeazu more for his submission today.

Johnnyessence:
On the other hand, I submit that section 140(2) of the
Electoral Act, even if it is held to still be effective, is
IRRELEVANT to the majority decision in Osun. This is because,
in my humble opinion, section 140(2) can only be USED or be
applied in these three instances:
1. Where an election tribunal or court nullifies the ENTIRE
election on the ground that the person who obtained the
highest votes at the election was not qualified to contest
the election, or
2. Where an election tribunal or court nullifies the ENTIRE
election on the ground that election was marred by
substantial irregularities or
3. Where an election tribunal or court nullifies the ENTIRE
election on the ground that there was SUBSTANTIAL non-
compliance with the provisions of this Act.
Based, on that section, I think it is only where ANY ONE of the
above three options applies that the election tribunal or court
is mandated to not declare the person with the second highest
votes as elected, but to order a fresh election. In my humble
view, none of those three instances WAS PRESENT in the
OSUN State scenario. Accordingly, section 140(2) does not
apply. Reasons:
1. In Osun State, the Tribunal’s decision DID NOT nullify the
ENTIRE election as invalid. Only the rerun election was
canceled; so, section 140(2) is inapplicable;
2. In the Osun State case, the Tribunal’s decision did not
declare that the person earlier declared winner (Oyetola)
was not qualified to contest. So, Section 140(2) is
irrelevant here;
3. The Tribunal’s decision in Osun did not declare that there
was substantial non-compliance of the entire election,
with the Electoral Act. The Tribunal’s decision was only
that some part (namely THE RERUN ELECTION in 7
wards) did not comply with the Electoral Act. It was only
the seven (7) wards adversely affected, and NOT THE
ENTIRE GOVERNORSHIP ELECTION, that was canceled
and deducted So, section 140(2) has no relevance here.

AlphaT1:
What are you saying pls? Those guys are richer than the president, how much do you think is their total legitimate emolument?..Leave this ur story abeg....we are all Nigerians, you don't need to cook any cock and bull story for us, we can see with our eyes and hear with our ears.

Drbabalola:
Sir Can You Please Clarify Your Statement? Did Ikpeazu Did Well Or Performed Badly? And What Do You Think Will Likely Happen Based On His Arguments?

BeijinDossier:
Wow i thought it was a joke until i googled it

Lalasticlala