kahal29:


Is a pity that a SAN in the person of Mike is not aware of a subsisting FHC judgement delivered by Justice Gabriel Kolawole on the 22nd July, 2011 where he ordered election petition tribunals sitting across the federation to ignore provisions of section 140(2) and 141 of Electoral Act 2010, saying it was vague, unconstitutional and a deliberate attempt by the legislative arm of government to usurp powers of the judiciary.

Nullifying the two sections, the high court equally gave election tribunals nod to declare a candidate winner of any disputed election process brought before it, stressing that provisions of the aforementioned sections were inconsistent with both section 239 and 285 of the 1999 Constitution as amended.

Section 140 still stands. Stop spreading this misinformation.

My question now is if INEC knew the PDP primaries were not valid, why go ahead and print ballot papers and conduct the elections in the first place


Its all twisted

maupe:

Section 140 still stands. Stop spreading this misinformation.

The proper thing for you to do is to appeal it.

That's is Mr Mike's personal opinion but not based on legal logic. If the suit was joint between APC and possibly a PDP candidate who was schemed out by the unlawful primaries in Abuja, then his logic would have meant little something.
When a team fielded an illegitimate player for a match and win, the football governing body do not stage a 're-match, they will rather award 3 points and 2 goals for the victim team and a fine against the culprit team.

In the Olympic games, when the winner fail a drug test, you don't stage a rerun race but rather the silver medallist is awarded the gold and others behind will be upgraded in various finishing positions.

When people who should know better reasons like an ignorant man on the street, it makes vou wonder. As long as the law is concerned, this Taraba case is the easiest to deal with for any sane judge because it's very straightforward.

dustmalik:

It's you who has refused to come to terms with the reality of the judgement. The PDP, according to the judgement, didn't have a candidate in that election. So why would the tribunal order a rerun? When, in fact, the only eligible candidate with the highest number of votes was Aisha Alhassan.

PDP and APC are not the ony parties that contested the Taraba elections!!

Eziachi:
That's is Mr Mike's personal opinion but not based on legal logic. If the suit was joint between APC and possibly a PDP candidate who was schemed out by the unlawful primaries in Abuja, then his logic would have meant little something.
When a team fielded an illegitimate player for a match and win, the football governing body do not stage a 're-match, they will rather award 3 points and 2 goals for the victim team and a fine against the culprit team.

In the Olympic games, when the winner fail a drug test, you don't stage a rerun race but rather the silver medallist is awarded the gold and others behind will be upgraded in various finishing positions.

When people who should know better reasons like an ignorant man on the street, it makes vou wonder. As long as the law is concerned, this Taraba case is the easiest to deal with for any sane judge because it's very straightforward.

That is not his personal opinion,it is also the position of the law on this issue.

Mogidi:
Just a matter of time, the COA would surely throw the tribunal's verdict where it belongs>>>>in the dustbin.

And when they don't, who will you accuse of partiality this time? Instead of being angry with PDP you people are blaming the wrong people.
How can you blame FIFA or the team awarded the point instead of blaming the coach and team management for fielding an illegitimate player in a crucial match?

Eziachi:
That's is Mr Mike's personal opinion but not based on legal logic. If the suit was joint between APC and possibly a PDP candidate who was schemed out by the unlawful primaries in Abuja, then his logic would have meant little something.
When a team fielded an illegitimate player for a match and win, the football governing body do not stage a 're-match, they will rather award 3 points and 2 goals for the victim team and a fine against the culprit team.

In the Olympic games, when the winner fail a drug test, you don't stage a rerun race but rather the silver medallist is awarded the gold and others behind will be upgraded in various finishing positions.

When people who should know better reasons like an ignorant man on the street, it makes vou wonder. As long as the law is concerned, this Taraba case is the easiest to deal with for any sane judge because it's very straightforward.

Tell them!

Missy89:


Tell them!

Unfortunately for you mofos we do not use the olympic constitution to run our country

chukwudi44:


Bros he said order a re-run!! Cant you understand simple english? Why are you guys suddenly scared of a re-run?

Why should they order a rerun if the law never authorized it under the circumstances of the facts presented to them? Law is different from personal opinion or personal judgement.
The way law see things is different from the way a man of the street does sees it. Even Judges often gave a judgement they doesn't personally agreed with because the law tied their hand. They often express this by their obiter dictum.
Many people are just totally ignorant of the law, including the so called SAN lawyers and I blamed it on many decades of military rule, which makes the judiciary an institution seen but not heard.

chukwudi44:


Unfortunately for you mofos we do not use the olympic constitution to run our country

That's a typical person logic hail bent on wallowing on ignorant when you allow personal partisanship to dictate how you reason.
It was the same reason Amaechi becomes a governor. If the second person in that election went to court instead of Amaechi, he could have become Amaechi. The main loser here in the person in PDP who believed they were schemes out by the primary in Taraba capital but never took the opportunity but the APC did.

chukwudi44:


That is not his personal opinion,it is also the position of the law on this issue.

The tribunal quoted the Act they based their judgment on and it was quite easy to read and understand. Tell me which law or Act you are referring?

Eziachi:
That's a typical person logic hail bent on wallowing on ignorant when you allow personal partisanship to dictate how you reason.

This is not logic man!! Our constition clearly states what should done under such circumstances!!the worst result should be to order for a re-run as stated in the electoral act.

Eziachi:
The tribunal quoted the Act they based their judgment on and it was quite easy to read and understand. Tell me which law or Act you are referring?

Section 40(2) it has been repeated severally on this forukm and you cant claim ignorance of it

Eziachi:
The tribunal quoted the Act they based their judgment on and it was quite easy to read and understand. Tell me which law or Act you are referring?

EZIACHI, KINDLY POST THE FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGEMENT IF POSSIBLE.

THANKS.

PRYCE:
People kept saying that clause in the electoral act was rejected by the court but the question is, was it expunged from the ACT?? The courts cannot dictate to the HOA what laws to make and not to make!

A MERE LEGISLATION CANNOt remove the power of the judiciary if it contradicts the constitution

maupe:

Stop misleading people with this. The section still stands and has in no way been expunged from the act. The court for its own personal reasons chose to ignore that and rule otherwise

The purported section 140(2) is a revolutionary dead end

chukwudi44:


This is not logic man!! Our constition clearly states what should done under such circumstances!!the worst result should be to order for a re-run as stated in the electoral act.

You kept referring to your constitution without any references. Ignorantly you forgot that any passage of parliamentary Act that is assented becomes part of the law (constitution) but subject to amendment at any time unlike the main constitution that goes through rigours. I find it astonishing how ignorant people are even in this vast information age. Terrible!

Olaolufred:


EZIACHI, KINDLY POST THE FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGEMENT IF POSSIBLE.

THANKS.

That's not my job. Find it yourself. It is all over the internet. It's still on premium times website.

Lol everybody just dey quote constitution

BleSSedMee:
My question now is if INEC knew the PDP primaries were not valid, why go ahead and print ballot papers and conduct the elections in the first place


Its all twisted

You spoke what I've been wondering

Eziachi:
That's not my job. Find it yourself. It is all over the internet. It's still on premium times website.

THANKS.
HAD A TIGHT SCHEDULE IN THE MORNING.
BUT NOW READ IT.
PDP HAD ALWAYS BEEN USED TO SUBSTITUTING NAMES OF CANDIDATES DULY CHOSEN IN A PRIMARY.
SO CONSENSUS CANDIDATES IS NO ISSUE TO THEM.
PDPIS HAVE BEEN VIOLATING ANYTHING VIOLATE-ABLE SINCE 1999.
SO, WE ARE NOT SURPRISED.

EZIACHI, AGAIN I SAY THANKS.

chukwudi44:


Section 40(2) it has been repeated severally on this forukm and you cant claim ignorance of it

Section 40 subsection 2 as amended by the Act in question. Use your brain bro.