AAA593:

Despite the fact that the kangaroo judgment will not stand, I think APC will not contest.

As in the case of Victor Umeh vs Uche Ekwunife over the Anambra central senatorial election 2015. Ekwunife was disqualified and PDP didnt present a new candidate in the rescheduled fresh election which Senator Victor Umeh won. So in this bayelsa case, It is not lawful, the period for submission and replacing of names of candidate for the election has since been concluded so no new name can be submitted. I stand to be corrected

don't even bother urself, the judgement is clear...A fresh election to be conducted and ANDP should be on the ballot. So it means the excluded ANDP should be added to the list of qualified candidates before the election which APC was never qualified

In as much as I don't agree with the majority judgement, the appeal court may like affirm their decision. Reasons are;

ANDP never hinged their case on the fact that they where disqualified before the election, but instead they smartly hinged it on the fact that "their logo and party was not on the ballot" which is a ground for filing to the tribunal.

They are hammering on the Word " Disqualified " knowing fully well that by law , inec lack the power to disqualify any candidate....only a court has the ability to interprete the constitution not inec.

What I expected inec to have done is play the "Atiku drama" "we have no server" they could have said ANDP never submitted a candidate and as such never showed interest in the election. This would have raised the bar of proof for the ANDP which will eventually lead to them killing their case by telling the court they nominated an" invalid candidate "

Look at the two pictures posted of same game played by another person and was won and paid, was never voided nor cancelled.....the lagos state lottery board and national consumer protection agency is on it. My lawyers also working on it

Bluehill1051:
I'd suggest u first go through the result of each and every game u played on your winning ticket to give you morale. See something, even if 1 game was cancelled, they are suppose to void just that game and not the entire ticket and not even after crediting your bet9ja account. Post every evidence you have here, no matter how little, post the ticket games, everything possible. The last battle I had was with merrybet and I won with the help of Lagos lottery board.Don't give up

I need your prayers as I followup the case from next week.....

Check the two games and see that the other plunters games were won and paid, same game same time. They never new I had evidences , before they blocked my account and wipe the history

Good morning ,

I write to inform you of a fraudulent act carried out by the above named  company which many other people had been complaining about but couldn't voice out.

I am a Nigerian whom have be betting with bet9ja for more than 4months, I have incurred so much losses as a result of betting up to the tune of 1.9M with bet9ja which I took responsibility for, on the 4th of June  2020 I played a game with 137,000naira and won 11million naira "which was credited to my betting account(bet9ja)", all evidences are attached.  Immediately I tried to make a withdrawal ,bet9ja blocked my account only for them to reopen it today 6th of June 2020 and voided the already won and paid bet , not knowing that I have evidences of same game staked by other plunters that was deemed either "won/lost" and never voided. I am a concerned citizen and would not allowed this fraudulently act of theirs that had long been happening gone unpunished.  They cannot choose my own game cancelled and voided when the general games were never cancelled or voided.  I need ur urgent intervention as I already contacted my lawyer who advised on informing you and getting feedback, before we proceed on a legal action.  Attached are few evidences.  More than 200 screenshots are available.  Will fight this even with the last drop of my blood.  Thanks as I await ur response and immediate action. 

Thanks 

"Let's sanitize Nigeria from illegality for once"

 DJRUFUS2  8782733 RUFUS OLUDEJI JOHN 


Message sent to national lottery commission and Efcc.

Bimpe29:
In as much as I love PDP to emerge victorious in Kano Gubernatorial Election, I strongly condemn the call to disobey the laws and order because of party's dissatisfaction.
Illegality must be cured with due process of law always.

in as much as i support going through legal means, politicians especially the ruling party now hide under " if you are not satisfy ,go to court" after they must have rigged their way through. Knowing fully well they can also muscle the judiciary. The judiciary too aint helping matter, as the keep raise the bar of standard of proof every time , making it almost impossible to prove a daylight robbery.

Afamed:

You have just justified why I said most of the PDP supporters are half baked and brain dead again
1) Show me which part of INEC / Electoral law permits transmission of election/ votes data?
2) If most of PDP supporters are not half-baked like I said before and if you have followed the court hearing during the Tribunal, they asked Atiku's lawyers to provide the INEC site, he had the transmission of data, Atiku lawyers provided. www.factdontlie.com.ng. The question a knowledgeable person should ask is, is www.factdontlie.com.ng the INEC server?
You can see why I said most of PDP supporters are half-baked and brain dead

this issue of "does the electoral law permits transmission of results " is absurd to me. The bone of contention here is that was it transmitted or not. Is like saying "the law prohibits stealing" so a suspect that stole a car couldn't have stole it because the law prohibits it, so no need to talk about it. The law is meant to checkmate u when u go against it. In this instant case inec knew it was against the law, but transmitted it, and the law now be used to justify that he couldnt have transmitted it. Its like saying " over voting is against the electoral law, so inec couldnt have declared a result, if there is overvoting" then there will be no need for a tribunal. I believe the essence of a tribunal is to prove that an electoral law has been breach . Not that "it can not be breach"

Melikam:
*HIGHLIGHTS ON THE VERDICT OF THE COURT OF APPEAL IN THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION PETITION*

1. On qualification: the Judges agreed that the Petitioners have a burden of proving that Buhari is not qualified and did not discharge that burden.

Analysis: The Issue of qualification is a constitutional requirement and the grounds for qualification are many. A person desirous of standing for election must identify the best constitutional provision that makes him qualified and use as his qualification. A person is not allowed to simply say that he/she is qualified after the election, by relying on any of the Constitutional provisions. You must choose your qualifications and swim or sink with it. Buhari did not say that his qualification was being educated up to secondary school certificate level, he said that he obtained the secondary school certificate. He did not rely on his ability to speak, understand and write English language, he said that he had the Secondary School Certificate, not the equivalent. Therefore, he is to swim or sink with a Secondary School Certificate.

Conclusion: the Court of Appeal is manifestly wrong to have enlarged Buhari's grounds of qualification by ascribing to him, qualifications that he never claimed to rely on in his form CF001. The burden of proof is on the party who alleges. However, the burden shifts to the Respondent the moment the Petitioner showed that the 2nd Respondent did not meet the requirement of qualification as required in form CF001, (which is a form made pursuant to the Electoral Act and therefore part of the Act) to attach all evidence of educational qualifications.

a. The Petitioners showed the Court that the 2nd Respondent did not attach the certificates he relied on for his qualification as a mandatory requirement of the Electoral Act vide the Form CF001. It then becomes the duty of Buhari to show why he did not attach evidence of his qualification to the said form.

b. In his bid to justify his failure to comply with the law as required in form CF001, to attach evidence of his educational qualifications, Buhari deposed to a separate Affidavit (not the verifying affidavit that forms part of the form CF001) at the FCT High Court in 2014, wherein he claimed that his certificates as listed in the form CF001 are currently with the Secretary of Army Board.

c. The Petitioners show to the Court that that Army denied the claims in that Affidavit. At this point, it became the duty of Buhari to produce the Certificate from the Army and he failed to do so. In fact, Buhari never testified in Court. Instead, his own witness testified against his interest upon their own questions. The Petitioners discharged their burden of proof even beyond the threshold of the criminal law standard.

2. False Declaration: The Court agreed that the Petitioners failed to proof that Buhari lied in aid of his qualification.

Analysis: this angle of the decision is most mind boggling of all. The Court went out to shop for a defence for Buhari and thereby fabricated an explanation for the lies. One of the judges even called this ground an allegation of perjury, thereby showing his total lack of understanding the provision of the Electoral Act.

Conclusion: Interestingly, the Court totally decided to be ignorant of the decision of the Supreme Court in *ABDULRAUF ABDULKADIR MODIBBO VS. MUSTAPHA USMAN & 2 ORS.* delivered on 30th July, 2019 wherein the meaning of FALSE DECLARATION was defined and the consequences/standard of proving same were established. They went on a voyage of inferences and imagined that Buhari truly submitted his certificates to the Army in 1961 even when his Course mate clearly stated in open Court that none of them gave any certificate to the Army. The judges choose to disregard these testimony by saying that the witness was not in the position of making that determination. Remember, Buhari brought him in order to make the point that they submitted their certificate to the Army. So, this is the Court, making overt efforts to defend Buhari.

Note that, Buhari never claimed that his certificates were missing or that he is unaware of its whereabout. He made a clear declaration in an affidavit that his certificates were with the Army. The Petitioners demonstrated that the Army have denied being in possession of the certificates. At this points, it becomes the duty of Buhari to make sure that the Army produce his certificates. He is making a positive assertion that a certificate exist, while the Petitioners asserted that it doesn't. So, a negative assertion cannot be proved, it only needs to be stated. It is the duty of the person who asserts the positive to proof its existence. Buhari failed to do this and the Court applauded him for it for failing to produce his certificates from the Army for the inspection of the Court.

3. Server. The Court agreed that the Petitioners did not proof the existence of a server and the transmission of Election results to the INEC server.

Analysis: the entire case of server was built and centred on INEC. INEC denied having any server in their Reply to the Petition. During the trial, the Petitioners called many INEC Ad-Hoc staff who participated in the 2019 Presidential Election. They all confirmed, in their testimonies before the Court, that they were trained by INEC to transmit the result of the Election electronically using the Smart Card Reader. INEC Cross-examined them using the content of the Petition and the Statement on Oaths deposed to by the Ad-Hoc staff. INEC, Buhari and APC never asked any of the Ad-Hoc staff any question from the content of their own (INEC, Buhari and APC) Replies to the Petition, wherein their denial of Server and transmission were contained. Therefore, neither INEC, Buhari nor APC can rely solely on answers gotten from these Ad-Hoc staff as their defence in this case. Even one of the Judges agreed that INEC abandoned their defence and as such the Petitioners only needed to proof minimally in respect of server and the transmission of results. But, the lead judgment was conclusive that INEC and APC did not abandon their defence and that they were even right to rely on the evidence extracted from the cross-examination that did not emanate from their pleadings - what a court!

The Judge who made an addendum on the question of server, observed that INEC failed to call any witness to contradict the witnesses of the Petitioners and that by so doing, INEC had abandoned their defence, having not extracted the evidence they relied on from their own pleadings. This is the correct law. This admonition only reveals that the Court knew the truth, but went on to please the powers that be.

Conclusion:
It is a sad day for any nation, for judges to constitute themselves as businessmen ready to hand judgment to the most powerful. The judgment of the 9/11/19 was anything but a decision based on the evidence before the Court.

The judge never made any reference to the defence of any of the Respondents in his judgment. He went on to obtain evidence that were never before the Court and relied on same to dismiss the Petition. He inferred that Buhari must have got a certificate before the Army recruited him in 1961, inspite of conflicting evidence of when exactly Buhari even joined the Army. One of the judges told Nigeria that an old witness cannot lie, but forgot that the same witness had said Buhari was recruited into the Army in 1962. So, where the judges actually the 4th Respondents? Yes, they were and that was the reason for their unanimity of decision. They gave a judgment that is disconnect from the facts and laws placed before them.

Nigerians are not surprised at all. Nigerians already forecast that the Court is weak and helpless. The Court of Appeal only confirmed this belief.

It is not left for the Supreme Court to decide if Nigerians can look to the Judiciary for any hope of justice. The Supreme Court will have to decide if Nigerians need to determine what qualification they intend to rely on for contesting election and how they are to show that they posses the qualification they've chosen to rely on.

For now, qualification is needless as a claim of having one, without more, will suffice. Atleast, that was the thinking of persons who called themselves judges.

the bias of the judges in respect to the certificate and false declaration grounds of the petition is very obvious. They went out of both counsels arguement to to justify their judgement. "Judges are not father christmas and as such only judge cases based on fact and evidences brought before them" those judges developed facts for the respondents, beyond their arguments. You dismiss a video evidence of nigeria army denying having buhari's certificate, yet u used content of same video to arrive at your judgement.
You rejected the video on the ground that "it was't the author that came to testify with it" yet you accepted the CAMBRIDGE RESULT testified by abba kyari who is not cambridge VC.

ejimatic:
. Same appliee to 2019...perjury or false oath must be challenged about 14 days bfr election not after election or when winner has been declared

that is not true, read the five grounds on which election can be questioned according to the electoral act section 138 (1) 2010 amended 2015. False information in a form cf001 has now been added as a post election suit at the tribunal. Beside the recent judgement of the supreme court led to sack of a senator on false information on is form cf001 , where he falsify his age in other to be qualified

garfield1:

Are you not mistaken because am thinking that qualification is both a civil and election petition matter.according to the electoral act,non qualification is a ground for challenging an election.again,i think a few cases at the ongoing election tribunals have been decided based on educstional qualifications.i stand to be corrected though.cc wirinet,zoedew

u are absolutely correct. The truth is non qualification is both pre and post election case depending on when and which court is entertaining the suit. If an aspirant files a non qualification suit against another aspirant before the election he/she must do that within 14days from the cause of the event in a high court or court of corresponding jurisdiction. If the 14days elapse before filing the suit, then the suit is termed statute-barred" because its a pre election suit". Once the 14days window elapse, the best option is to file the suit at the ELECTION TRIBUNAL which is the only court empowered to trial a POST ELECTION CASE

ejimatic:
Buhari did not present three certificates bearing different names.Let leave sentiments. He is educationally qualified to contest in view of the constitutional requirement to contest as the president.....Section 140 of the constitution says ....educated to the secondary school level or it's equivalent....The result he used which was also tendered in court qualifies him to contest....

pls read the petition again, " the 2nd respondent was at the time of the election not qualify to contest" no body said buhari is not qualify to contest because olanipekun just proved he's qualify to contest at the court with the documents tendered....but buhari as at the time of the election (60 days as prescribe by d constitution ) could not prove he was qualify to contest , because he didnt tender anytin...he used an affidavit dat is "stale" to tell inec his "certificate " is with the military meaning he has certificate and is not missing.....

seunmsg:



Sometimes, I wonder if some of you actually wrote the same WAEC that some of us wrote. If you sit for 8 papers and score F9 in two subjects and P/D8 and above in the other 6 subjects, your certificate will reflect only six subject while your statement of result issued by your school and the WAEC master sheet would reflect the entire 8 subjects.

In the case of Buhari, it is very obvious the original certificate is lost. So, I don’t know the certificate you are talking about that showed 8 papers. WAEC issued an attestation of result to the president last year showing only 6 subjects. Cambridge also issued a certifying statement of result this year showing the same 6 subjects and same grades as shown in that of WAEC. So, where exactly is the discrepancy that you’re taking about? Please back up your claim by posting a copy of any Buhari certificate either from WAEC or Cambridge showing 8 subjects.

the constitution stipulates that for u to contest for president "education up to secondary school cert or its equivalent is required, it explains school cert in section 318 to include evidence of proof of secondary school education, even primary school cert. Or evidence of ability to read or write as certified by inec. Nobody can say buhari isnt qualify going by this.

Now here is the twist

Atiku petition didnt say buhari was qualify to contest ,rather he said buhari is not qualify to contest "as at the time of the Election"
Cos he didnt show the necessary proof to inec as at that time that he was qualify contest.

He also used an outdated affidavit to back up his nomination form......

Its difficult to defend

This ICT guy is very smart..."when asked if the scientific method he used can be use to alter the result on the server, he simply answered YES" he is trying to say in case the tribunal grant access to the server, it is possible another ICT expert from APC would av already alter the initial results on the server....

Deepthoughts:
what I know for certain about the INEC server is that,the law does not permit the electronic transfer of elections results,but INEC had n used the server fraudulently in other to monitor n know the elections results upfront n then rejig the results to make sure buhari/Apc emerge victorious before publicly announcing the results, INEC/Apc thought since the law forbids the electronic transfer of elections results no one would care n they could easily get away their criminal collaborations but they have been suprised n now desperately trying to cover their shameful deeds, it's up to the judges in their consciences to decide whether it's right for public institutions to engage in clandestine criminality to serve some parochial interest or to maintain the highest level of integrity n public trust at all times.

that is exactly what happened..u nailed it.

xoftcore:

what the Bleep am i looking for in Australia
Home with the highest number of world deadly animals

Those animals are better romance than naija leaders oo