When PMB inaugurated his legal team headed by Wole SAN, I told few people that cared to listen and a friend Ratello that Wole is a technical genius and he is going to drag this case and try to battle Atiku's petitions on technical grounds.

Like predicted, they failed to respond to the petitions promptly, rather they waited to exhaust the 30 days stipulated time to file their response. Thereby stretching the case to buy more time.

One of the issues PDP raise was that the elementary school Buhari claimed he attended were not in existence as of the time he claimed he attended them.

Of course, we needed answer to this and other petitions, like a typical Wole, he filed a counter-claim praying the court to strike out Atiku's petitions on technical ground.

One of the issues PDP seeks an answer to is why total votes casted and total number accreditation don't tally.

This is impossible without rigging. We saw this during the Adamawa re-run where total votes casted equaled the total accreditation.

Every Nigerian, of course, except zombies expect Nigeria to explain why in the case of the presidential election, it wasn't so.

Instead of telling us, they filed another counter-claim telling the Tribunal to strike out the petition on ground that Atiku lawyer is not licensed to practiced law in Nigeria.

I believe the routes APC and INEC took are very risky but I think since they don't have reasonable responses to the petitions they chose to take the risk either to buy more time or they are just clueless.

Here are the implications of the counter-claims.

First, APC's claim that Atiku is not qualified to run for election is not only baseless, but stupid.

They have to provide material evidence that Jada was part of Northern Cameroon because there are evidence that they are not.

Ratello has done justice to that in this thread
https://www.nairaland.com/5133238/jada-never-northern-cameroon

Let even assume that Jada was part of Northern Cameroon. Section 36( of our constitution automatically nullifies that claim.

That section confers retrospective jurisdiction on our laws. This means no law has jurisdiction to try a case that occurred before it was passed.

The pleb that made Atiku a Nigerian occurred in 1961, so you can't use 1999 constitution to adjudicate on matter that happened in 1961.

Again, the pleb was organised according to an act of parliament that was validly made and recognised by a law that preceded the 1999 constitution.

1999 constitution has no power to adjudicate on that law and APC's defence has to prove that the section of the law they based their claims excluded those who became Nigerian by plebiscites and they would have to argue it in such a way that it would not contravene natural justice.

The Tribunal will trash this case on these grounds and on the ground of natural justice (law of equity).

INEC is even more stupid.

The licence fee for SANs is N50,000 and the deadline to make this payment is 31st March.

If Atiku's lawyers were not licensed as of the time they filed the petitions, Atiku's petitions would be declared null and void.

But if this is the main ground INEC is challenging Atiku's petition, then they are even more stupid than APC.

Atiku has over 5 SANs and all we need is just one signature from someone that is licensed to strike out INEC's petitions.

Now, what do you think would happen should the Tribunal strike out APC's and INEC's claims knowing that no court has power to grant a relief that was sought for?

Flawless and sweet victory for Atikulated Nigerians.

[s][/s]

ChristianNorth:
When PMB inaugurated his legal team headed by Wole SAN, I told few people that cared to listen and a friend Ratello that Wole is a technical genius and he is going to drag this case and try to battle Atiku's petitions on technical grounds.

Like predicted, they failed to respond to the petitions promptly, rather they waited to exhaust the 30 days stipulated time to file their response. Thereby stretching the case to buy more time.

One of the issues PDP raise was that the elementary school Buhari claimed he attended were not in existence as of the time he claimed he attended them.

Of course, we needed answer to this and other petitions, like a typical Wole, he filed a counter-claim praying the court to strike out Atiku's petitions on technical ground.

One of the issues PDP seeks an answer to is why total votes casted and total number accreditation don't tally.

This is impossible without rigging. We saw this during the Adamawa re-run where total votes casted equaled the total accreditation.

Every Nigerian, of course, except zombies expect Nigeria to explain why in the case of the presidential election, it wasn't so.

Instead of telling us, they filed another counter-claim telling the Tribunal to strike out the petition on ground that Atiku lawyer is not licensed to practiced law in Nigeria.

I believe the routes APC and INEC took are very risky but I think since they don't have reasonable responses to the petitions they chose to take the risk either to buy more time or they are just clueless.

Here are the implications of the counter-claims.

First, APC's claim that Atiku is not qualified to run for election is not only baseless, but stupid.

They have to provide material evidence that Jada was part of Northern Cameroon because there are evidence that they are not.

Ratello has done justice to that in this thread
https://www.nairaland.com/5133238/jada-never-northern-cameroon

Let even assume that Jada was part of Northern Cameroon. Section 36( of our constitution automatically nullifies that claim.

That section confers retrospective jurisdiction on our laws. This means no law has jurisdiction to try a case that occurred before it was passed.

The pleb that made Atiku a Nigerian occurred in 1961, so you can't use 1999 constitution to adjudicate on matter that happened in 1961.

Again, the pleb was organised according to an act of parliament that was validly made and recognised by a law that preceded the 1999 constitution.

1999 constitution has no power to adjudicate on that law and APC's defence has to prove that the section of the law they based their claims excluded those who became Nigerian by plebiscites and they would have to argue it in such a way that it would not contravene natural justice.

The Tribunal will trash this case on these grounds and on the ground of natural justice (law of equity).

INEC is even more stupid.

The licence fee for SANs is N50,000 and the deadline to make this payment is 31st March.

If Atiku's lawyers were not licensed as of the time they filed the petitions, Atiku's petitions would be declared null and void.

But if this is the main ground INEC is challenging Atiku's petition, then they are even more stupid than APC.

Atiku has over 5 SANs and all we need is just one signature from someone that is licensed to strike out INEC's petitions.

Now, what do you think would happen should the Tribunal strike out APC's and INEC's claims knowing that no court has power to grant a relief that was sought for?

Flawless and sweet victory for Atikulated Nigerians.

][/s]
Where did you copy this junks from,?

funmijoyb:
[/s]] Where did you copy this junks from,?

Lol

Atiku that lost submitted his petition very close to the deadline(fact!), why then should APC that won be in a hurry to reply/respond?


I read up till I saw the word 'Zombie', that's when I knew you were out to make a fool of yourself, bask in your foolishness.

They've responded to the petitions individually, though not officially made public, why don't you allow the tribunal to decide whether their responses are tacky or not?

Lucid1:
Atiku that lost submitted his petition very close to the deadline(fact!), why then should APC that won be in a hurry to reply/respond?

At least we saw the effect of that on the strength of the petitions they filed.

You can't said that of APC's and INEC's responses to that petition.

funmijoyb:
[/s]]
Where did you copy this junks from,?

prove him wrong by quoting the section in the constitution that says otherwise and stop yarning trash

ChristianNorth:

Lol

Omo igbo

funmijoyb:
Omo igbo

Lol

ChristianNorth:

Lol

Like I said in the other thread...

I just hope this is not what the APC wants to present as defense in court. I hope their ultimate plan is to file for an amendment later when they prepare their defense. A precedent had already been set for this arguement in Onyema Ugochukwu Vs TA Orji when Onyema filed, after the election that TA did not qualify to contest having not resigned his position as Chief Of Staff 3 months to election as required by law.
The court dismissed the case on the basis that the election tribunal does not consider eligibility but outcome of election. They inferred that Onyema should have filed for disqualification of TA prior to election and not after the election.

That is why no suit challenging Buhari's elegibilty due to waec be entertained by the election tribunal. PDP knows this and that's why they are not depending only on that point in their case.

APC will goof big time if their only defense is eligibility. They better use the modify button before it becomes late.

PDP: INEC, can you explain why total votes casted at the presidential election wasn't equal to total accreditation?

INEC: Tribunal, Atiku's lawyer was not licensed to practice law in Nigeria, please strike out the case.

Tribunal: INEC, what are your proofs?

**INEC tenders valid proofs**

Tribunal: We can't grant your prayers because petition was jointly filed by Atiku and PDP and you proved that Atiku's lawyer wasn't licensed to practice law but couldn't prove same for PDP's lawyer who counter-signed the petition.

Your claims are hereby dismissed.

Hmm

MaziOmenuko:
Like I said in the other thread...

I just hope this is not what the APC wants to present as defense in court. I hope their ultimate plan is to file for an amendment later when they prepare their defense. A precedent had already been set for this arguement in Onyema Ugochukwu Vs TA Orji when Onyema filed, after the election that TA did not qualify to contest having not resigned his position as Chief Of Staff 3 months to election as required by law.
The court dismissed the case on the basis that the election tribunal does not consider eligibility but outcome of election. They inferred that Onyema should have filed for disqualification of TA prior to election and not after the election.

That is why no suit challenging Buhari's elegibilty due to waec be entertained by the election tribunal. PDP knows this and that's why they are not depending only on that point in their case.

APC will goof big time if their only defense is eligibility. They better use the modify button before it becomes late.

You are wise Boss.

I equally said similar thing this morning. Supreme court frowns at filing pre-election matters at post-election tribunals.

That case should have been APC vs INEC with PDP as second respondent.

But APC filed that as a counter-claim to PDP's petition. Stupid move

APC have no case. They are just beating about the bush.