theoctopus:

Nobody is threathening anyone. The case is in court and there is a precedence. Asking for redress from a court of law is not a threat. 2 ACN governors became govs through the courts. Amaechi became governor through a court. Your position is pure sentiments not fact. Let the courts do their job. I am only reminding Nigerians of that process.

My position is pragmatic, yours is sentimental. I have not said there is no case against legislators that defected to APC. It remains to be proven there's no division in PDP. Part of me laughed at your "innocence"

1. Let's assume there's no division in PDP. INEC does not have powers to declare any seat vacant. Only courts can do that. INEC won't conduct election into any seat that's a subject of litigation. A supreme court verdict will have to be procured for INEC to act on any seat. It has 90 days to conduct election into such seat. Now, Abegunde's case has been on appeal for about 18 months. Judgment's day has not been reserved and no one knows when the verdict ll come out. Let's say there's an unfavorable verdict in April next year, an appeal to supreme court ll be filed in May 2014 and the cycle continues. That case ll last till early 2015. "Can you see what I am seeing"?



2. 3 (Ekiti, Osun, Edo) not 2 ACN governors retrieved their stolen mandate through litigation. In such cases, Court of Appeal, not the Supreme Court, has the definitive actionable ruling as stipulated by the 1999 constitution. So, once the court of appeal makes a pronouncement on election petition matters, it's final. Now the case at hand is completely different. One is election petition where the onus is on petitioner to prove that election did not comply substantially with electoral laws and as such be canceled or that s/he be declared the winner when "mago mago and wuru wuru" votes are voided. The other is the constitutionality or otherwise of moving from one party to another after election.

3.Amaechi case is remotely relevant but has little or no effect. Amaechi's case confirms that independent candidates can't stand for election in Nigeria, that a serving politician must belong to a political party. It's a classic case on "internal democracy" in a party, a so called fight against imposition.

Prof Corruption: Mr. Ifedayo Abegunde is still enjoying his mandate at
NASS
http://leadership.ng/news/111213/nema-wants-nass-support-build-resilient-communities
PS: this article is dated December 11, 2013.

You've really nailed those Pdp e-dogs with this post. You deserve 3 gbosas!!! You just spoilt their hope!

Prof Corruption:

My position is pragmatic, yours is sentimental. I have not said there is no case against legislators that defected to APC. It remains to be proven there's no division in PDP. Part of me laughed at your "innocence"

1. Let's assume there's no division in PDP. INEC does not have powers to declare any seat vacant. Only courts can do that. INEC won't conduct election into any seat that's a subject of litigation. A supreme court verdict will have to be procured for INEC to act on any seat. It has 90 days to conduct election into such seat. Now, Abegunde's case has been on appeal for about 18 months. Judgment's day has not been reserved and no one knows when the verdict ll come out. Let's say there's an unfavorable verdict in April next year, an appeal to supreme court ll be filed in May 2014 and the cycle continues. That case ll last till early 2015. "Can you see what I am seeing"?



2. 3 (Ekiti, Osun, Edo) not 2 ACN governors retrieved their stolen mandate through litigation. In such cases, Court of Appeal, not the Supreme Court, has the definitive actionable ruling as stipulated by the 1999 constitution. So, once the court of appeal makes a pronouncement on election petition matters, it's final. Now the case at hand is completely different. One is election petition where the onus is on petitioner to prove that election did not comply substantially with electoral laws and as such be canceled or that s/he be declared the winner when "mago mago and wuru wuru" votes are voided. The other is the constitutionality or otherwise of moving from one party to another after election.

3.Amaechi case is remotely relevant but has little or no effect. Amaechi's case confirms that independent candidates can't stand for election in Nigeria, that a serving politician must belong to a political party. It's a classic case on "internal democracy" in a party, a so called fight against imposition.

You should give a refund to your paymasters for your poor arguments.

Salami is at home enjoying his loot from those ACN cases. No problem.

Amaechi's case is very relevant to this case. In fact, Amaechi's case will be presented in court as a precedence by the plaintif. Amaechi's case is the foundation of it all. If you leave the party, you lose your seat because the party won the election, not the individual. It is very simple. Dont worry about the duration. That will be sorted

jmaine:

Read the OP, the dislodged Rep cited party crisis in the LP


Meanwhile the court has already declared there is no faction in the PDP.

I read the write up before I made my comment, my issue is that in the likely event of a glaring problem in a party it has to be the court, an external factor to determine if there is a problem or division within Even when some members formed a visible faction in the party?

stelaar:

I read the write up before I made my comment, my issue is that in the likely event of a glaring problem in a party it has to be the court as external factor to determine if there is a problem or division. Even when some members formed a faction in a party?

We have already passed that stage. The courts have already ruled there is no faction in the PDP. Stop making us repeat ourselves

Fraction, very funny, PDP remains and stands as one party. You are free to decamp but leave our mandate behind.

theoctopus:

You should give a refund to your paymasters for your poor arguments.

Salami is at home enjoying his loot from those ACN cases. No problem.

Amaechi's case is very relevant to this case. In fact, Amaechi's case will be presented in court as a precedence by the plaintif. Amaechi's case is the foundation of it all. If you leave the party, you lose your seat because the party won the election, not the individual. It is very simple. Dont worry about the duration. That will be sorted

I won't delve into the ordeals of Salami in the hands of PDP goons. I have just two questions for you. If indeed Salami influenced the course of justice and the PDP had weighty evidence against him, why was he allowed to retire (as against outright sack)? Why has the PDP led federal government refused to prosecute him?

Amaechi's case can't be the basis of what's explicitly written in the constitution. Let me break it down for you:

1.There was primary election where Amaechi emerged the PDP candidate for 2007. The primary election was not declared null and void by any court. It followed PDP's rules on how candidates should emerge to fly the party's flag. However, OBJ declared Amaechi candidature had "K-leg". His name was thus substituted with that of Celestine Omehia. PDP won the gubernatorial election.

2.Amaechi approached the court and sought reliefs that he be declared the authentic candidate of PDP having been elected according to the rules and regulations of PDP itself. The case was litigated to Supreme court and Amaechi won. In what amounted to judicial activism, the Supreme court ruled that since Amaechi was the right candidate of the PDP and PDP won the election, he should be the governor. The rest is history. The supreme court relied heavily on section 221 of 1999 constitution to issue that verdict:

221. No association, other than a political party, shall canvass for votes for any candidate at any election or contribute to the funds of any political party or to the election expenses of any candidate at an election.

Summary, no independent candidate can contest any election in Nigeria. It does not touch on constitutionality or otherwise of moving from one party to another after election. On that, the constitution is silent for governors but explicitly defined for legislators:

68. (1) A member of the Senate or of the House of Representatives shall vacate his seat in the House of which he is a member if -

(a) he becomes a member of another legislative house.

(b) any other circumstances arise that, if he were not a member of the Senate or the House of Representatives, would cause him to be disqualified for election as a member;

(c) he ceases to be a citizen of Nigeria;

(d) he becomes President, Vice-President, Governor, Deputy Governor or a Minister of the Government of the Federation or a Commissioner of the Government of a State or a Special Adviser.

(e) save as otherwise prescribed by this Constitution, he becomes a member of a commission or other body established by this Constitution or by any other law.

(f) without just cause he is absent from meetings of the House of which he is a member for a period amounting in the aggregate to more than one-third of the total number of days during which the House meets in any one year;

(g) being a person whose election to the House was sponsored by a political party, he becomes a member of another political party before the expiration of the period for which that House was elected;

Provided that his membership of the latter political party is not as a result of a division in the political party of which he was previously a member or of a merger of two or more political parties or factions by one of which he was previously sponsored; or

(h) the President of the Senate or, as the case may be, the Speaker of the House of Representatives receives a certificate under the hand of the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission stating that the provisions of section 69 of this Constitution have been complied with in respect of the recall of that member.

The highlighted says it all. Can you now see why Amaechi's case can't be the foundation for this one? Say thank you to Prof Corruption.

Kairoseki77:

All of them are still in PDP.

What is this one saying?

In Spirit they are in APC