fergie001:

Saturday.
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2021/01/alleged-certificate-forgery-obaseki-to-know-fate-january-9/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Oga,let's calculate it on our own from July and see when it will elapse

fergie001:


182: No person shall be qualified to the Office of a Governor of a State if:
(j)he has presented a forged Certificate to INEC.

I don't think so....the key witness here is DW-2.That is why it is difficult.

I have seen a case where a Gov in Nigeria had a Date of Birth (issued by NPC) different from the age on his NYSC Certificate of Exemption & Voter's Card...The Supreme Court said the Issuing Authority confirms.

Tbvh....I don't see it going the way of the Plaintiffs (considering the past and how this kind of cases have gone).

The witness is not key but documentary evidence proving forgery.I think the lower courts will remove him while the apex may save him

Agboriotejoye:

Do you believe too, that a document submitted in 2016 and for which there's no judicial prouncememt of being a fraud can be used in a 2020 case?

I thought we settled this yesterday

Dansuqi:


I thought we settled this yesterday

Yeah. I remember I cured your ignorance.
Don't mention your thanks.

Agboriotejoye:


Yeah. I remember I cured your ignorance.
Don't mention your thanks.

If he committed forgery in 2016,he will be removed my boy

Agboriotejoye:


Yeah. I remember I cured your ignorance.
Don't mention your thanks.

If he committed forgery in 2016,he will be removed my boy.you can return to your yabaleft abode

Agboriotejoye:

Do you believe too, that a document submitted in 2016 and for which there's no judicial prouncememt of being a fraud can be used in a 2020 case?

Yes.

Election cases are sui generis (i.e in a class of its own).

A Governor, his Deputy, President and Vice-President do not enjoy immunity as enshrined in Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution as amended, when it comes to election cases.

The Supreme Court in the celebrated case of Saleh v Abah., aptly put it that you don't need previous conviction to ascertain forgery when it comes to election cases.

All that is needed is a Proof that Mr. A submitted a forged document and the Issuing Authority stamping it as true.

In the case of Saleh v Abah, the Federal Polytechnic, Mubi emphatically said Abah didn't get a diploma (as he claimed) from their school. Infact, the rector called his Certificate a fraud.
He used this Certificate in 2011, but didn't use it on 2015.

Abah argued that previous conviction must have been proven, the Appeal Court validated his argument, but the Supreme Court said NO.

In your INEC form...there is a column you have to fill?

Have you ever presented a forged document to INEC? (YES/NO)

Dansuqi:


Oga,let's calculate it on our own from July and see when it will elapse

https://www.nairaland.com/6000887/olanipekun-four-sans-lead-cases#91864096

I don't know when it came up but Vanguard says it will expire midnight Saturday.

Dansuqi:

You are contradicting yourself .from the bolded,he is gone

You are not getting me.
By the exact words of the law he should be gone but wait till Saturday. Bayelsa and IMO are exceptions to the norm.

fergie001:

Yes.

Election cases are sui generis (i.e in a class of its own).

A Governor, his Deputy, President and Vice-President do not enjoy immunity as enshrined in Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution as amended, when it comes to election cases.

The Supreme Court in the celebrated case of Saleh v Abah., aptly put it that you don't need previous conviction to ascertain forgery when it comes to election cases.

All that is needed is a Proof that Mr. A submitted a forged document and the Issuing Authority stamping it as true.

In the case of Saleh v Abah, the Federal Polytechnic, Mubi emphatically said Abah didn't get a diploma (as he claimed) from their school. Infact, the rector called his Certificate a fraud.
He used this Certificate in 2011, but didn't use it on 2015.

Abah argued that previous conviction must have been proven, the Appeal Court validated his argument, but the Supreme Court said NO.

In your INEC form...there is a column you have to fill?

Have you ever presented a forged document to INEC? (YES/NO)

And who proved Obaseki submitted a forged documents in 2016.Funny enough this affidavit issue was not even presented to the court by the plantiff.

Dansuqi:
The witness is not key but documentary evidence proving forgery.I think the lower courts will remove him while the apex may save him

Maybe another angle, this is because the SC will definitely be on the spotlight for inconsistency.

I still don't think he will lose on Saturday, though.

fergie001:

Yes.

Election cases are sui generis (i.e in a class of its own).

A Governor, his Deputy, President and Vice-President do not enjoy immunity as enshrined in Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution as amended, when it comes to election cases.

The Supreme Court in the celebrated case of Saleh v Abah., aptly put it that you don't need previous conviction to ascertain forgery when it comes to election cases.

All that is needed is a Proof that Mr. A submitted a forged document and the Issuing Authority stamping it as true.

In the case of Saleh v Abah, the Federal Polytechnic, Mubi emphatically said Abah didn't get a diploma (as he claimed) from their school. Infact, the rector called his Certificate a fraud.
He used this Certificate in 2011, but didn't use it on 2015.

Abah argued that previous conviction must have been proven, the Appeal Court validated his argument, but the Supreme Court said NO.

In your INEC form...there is a column you have to fill?

Have you ever presented a forged document to INEC? (YES/NO)

No fergie. I disagree. What the SC said in that case was that the appellate court was wrong to have claimed a full trial, conviction and sentencing is what is needed to prove a case of forgery given that it is criminal in nature.
The SC went further to show that the election tribunal in 2011 already pronounced the certificate in question a forgery and based on that, Saleh can't answer a *NO* to that question. It was based on that previous 2011 judgement which was not appealed that SC based its judgement.
The reason I give this background is because we all know the timebound nature of election cases.
Which is why I ask if a forgery in 2016 which went unchallenged can be instituted in 2020 as this case presumes to do.

cktheluckyman:

And who proved Obaseki submitted a forged documents in 2016.Funny enough this affidavit issue was not even presented to the court by the plantiff.

He was asking for clarifications....
Nobody said Obaseki submitted forged documents.

cktheluckyman:

And who proved Obaseki submitted a forged documents in 2016.Funny enough this affidavit issue was not even presented to the court by the plantiff.

Exact issue I raised. It's obvious there's a confusion there

fergie001:

https://www.nairaland.com/6000887/olanipekun-four-sans-lead-cases#91864096

I don't know when it came up but Vanguard says it will expire midnight Saturday.

You said July 17 once

Agboriotejoye:

No fergie. I disagree. What the SC said in that case was that the appellate court was wrong to have claimed a full trial, conviction and sentencing is what is needed to prove a case of forgery given that it is criminal in nature.
The SC went further to show that the election tribunal in 2011 already pronounced the certificate in question a forgery and based on that, Saleh can't answer a *NO* to that question. It was based on that previous 2011 judgement which was not appealed that SC based its judgement.
The reason I give this background is because we all know the timebound nature of election cases.
Which is why I ask if a forgery in 2016 which went unchallenged can be instituted in 2020 as this case presumes to do.

What happens when Abah answers Yes?
Interprete Section 182(j)

As in, you go to an interview and say you once submitted a forged document (under oath) and say YES?

There has also been a judicial reconfirmation by the trial Court on the same issue as it relates to forgery of certificate for electoral purposes, by the 1st Respondent. These are not controverted and the 1st Respondent did not deem it fit to appeal this finding of facts that he perceived were adverse to his electoral fortune or political future. (Bage, JSC at the time)


The Court below should have looked at the certificate which the 1st respondent presented to INEC in 2011. The failure by the 1st respondent to include the National Diploma certificate in the INEC’s form CF001, 2015 General election, is not to say that (he) 1st respondent did not commit forgery. (Ogunbiyi, JSC at the time)


To this end, he filled out the INEC Form CF 001 that contains the question (Question No Have you ever presented a forged certificate to INEC In answer he said No.
The word ever simply means at any time- see Websters Comprehensive Dictionary. Had the first Respondent, at any time, presented a forged certificate to INEC. That was the question before the Court. and the Court below blindsided itself when it went into the issue of whether the Appellant established that the forged certificate that he used for the 2011 Election was intended for the 2011 Election, and whether he intended to use the false document as a genuine one.
(Augie JSC)

Dansuqi:


You said July 17 once

I sent you a NL-link
..I based it on that date.

Dansuqi:


If he committed forgery in 2016,he will be removed my boy.you can return to your yabaleft abode

Thank God you know where you're from. Unfortunately you got me confused for your neighbor.

fergie001:

What happens when Abah answers Yes?
Interprete Section 182(j)

As in, you go to am interview and say you once submitted a forged document (under oath) and say YES?

Of course abah won't answer Yes!! That question is purely academic.
What I'm establishing is that you can't use a 2016 occurrence to fight a 2020 case when there was no judicial prouncement backing up the 2016 issue. Even if Obaseki did a forgery in 2016, as long as there was no judicial prouncement before 180 days expired in 2016, it becomes dead, moreso when that particular term has expired.
It's akin to taking Tinubu to court now over the Chicago matter in 2020. Is it possible?

Agboriotejoye:

Thank God you know where you're from. Unfortunately you got me confused for your neighbor.

Obaseki is going down boy.

Dansuqi:

Obaseki is going down boy.

What about you? Where are you?
FYI ize iyamu is disqualified. Go and wet your pillow with your tears.

fergie001:

I sent you a NL-link
..I based it on that date.

I see the judge ruling against him.its supreme that's the koko

Agboriotejoye:

What about you? Where are you?
FYI ize iyamu is disqualified. Go and wet your pillow with your tears.

I am still basking in the massive victories of apc over pdp in almost all foras.I am inundated with joy so you that rarely experience a win in pdp can revel in tears.since you dont have a pillow,use a bin rag

Dansuqi:


I see the judge ruling against him.its supreme that's the koko

I don't.

Agboriotejoye:

Of course abah won't answer Yes!! That question is purely academic.
What I'm establishing is that you can't use a 2016 occurrence to fight a 2020 case when there was no judicial prouncement backing up the 2016 issue. Even if Obaseki did a forgery in 2016, as long as there was no judicial prouncement before 180 days expired in 2016, it becomes dead, moreso when that particular term has expired.
It's akin to taking Tinubu to court now over the Chicago matter in 2020. Is it possible?

It is very very possible, unless the case has gone through all the Courts.

In very tight situations, foreclosed cases are even opened.





Look at one of the Judges' comment here;

There is evidence that the first Respondent presented a forged certificate for the 2011 Election, and in answering NO to the question have you ever presented a forged certificate to INEC.

He gave false information to INEC in its Form CF 001, and the Appellant did what he was expected to do in the circumstances; file the Suit against him and leave it to the Court to determine whether the information is false.

The trial Court determined the question in his favour, however, the Court below obfuscated matters when it went beyond the question to draw the distinction between the 2011 and 2015 General Elections and come up with an extreme view of the standard of proof required. (Amina Augie, JSC)

Dansuqi:



I am still basking in the massive victories of apc over pdp in almost all foras.I am inundated with joy so you that rarely experience a win in pdp can revel in tears.since you dont have a pillow,use a bin rag

What's a bin rag? You Sabi low things sha

fergie001:

I don't.

Why? You know lower courts are easily swayed

Dansuqi:

Why? You know lower courts are easily swayed

I do but it hurts a judge to see his case thrown out by Superior Courts.
So, they are indeed careful.
Obaseki is more IN than OUT, since UI confirmed.
So to the Judge...which side should I tilt to!

inforesource:
I trust our courts. Don't ask me which trust.

why ?

fergie001:

I do but it hurts a judge to see his case thrown out by Superior Courts.
So, they are indeed careful.
Obaseki is more IN than OUT, since UI confirmed.
So to the Judge...which side should I tilt to!

Am not looking at ui but the 2016 case

fergie001:

It is very very possible, unless the case has gone through all the Courts.

In very tight situations, foreclosed cases are even opened.





Look at one of the Judges' comment here;

There is evidence that the first Respondent presented a forged certificate for the 2011 Election, and in answering NO to the question have you ever presented a forged certificate to INEC.

He gave false information to INEC in its Form CF 001, and the Appellant did what he was expected to do in the circumstances; file the Suit against him and leave it to the Court to determine whether the information is false.

The trial Court determined the question in his favour, however, the Court below obfuscated matters when it went beyond the question to draw the distinction between the 2011 and 2015 General Elections and come up with an extreme view of the standard of proof required. (Amina Augie, JSC)

You are three much