[color=#000099][/color]

BluntCrazeMan:
I understand this line of argument.

CBN is answerable to the FG, but it is not a part of the FG.

Thus, if the Supreme Court gave orders to the CBN with respect to a case that never had them as any of the respondents, then it became a biigg joke.
Thus, if the Supreme Court knew what they were doing, they would have issued orders to the FG to direct the CBN,, rather than issuing direct orders to the CBN that was never a party to the case.

The Supreme Court cannot issue order to FG to issue to CBN because CBN is an independent body even though it is answerable to the FG. CBN should have been a party to the case. It's just like taking election related matters to court without involving the INEC as a party to case.

The Supreme Court is the highest arbiter in the country. The Courts interpet the law. Not the Executive, not the Legislature. A court judgement is a process, its a marathon, not a dash. In between that process their are orders, rulings, etc.on various aspects of the case. This is so, so that all parties are given opportunity to present their own side of the case. This is clear to all countries practicing democracy and even some monarchies.

The Supreme Court was clear on the interim order granted on the Naira redesign. The President just disobeyed a valid court order for reasons that are not explainable. Its unfortunate.

AfricanColumbus:
Nothing supercedes a presidential executive order. It can only be revoked by the president himself if it is deemed to be grossly unconstitutional.

Presidential executive orders are final.


For the number 3 question, the executive and judiciary are equal, but the head of the executive (president) supercedes all in the land.

This one is just contradicting himself.

If the president supercedes all, who now has the power to deem his actions and orders "grossly unconstitutional"?

BluntCrazeMan:
Please,, is this your final answer on this??


Or you're guessing??
(This issue is serious ooo.. No joke with it ooo..)

The guy below you have given you the perfect answer.

The supreme court shouldn't have taken up the case, their efforts is now exercise in vain. In the executive list, monetary policy is there and this means the president's speech and order supercedes the supreme court by far

What a way for apc to end. I had always known that apc will fall apart disgracefully. It is a party built on lies and propaganda and nothing built on lies stands.

Freebills12:
[color=#000099][/color]

The Supreme Court cannot issue order to FG to issue to CBN because CBN is an independent body even though it is answerable to the FG. CBN should have been a party to the case. It's just like taking election related matters to court without involving the INEC as a party to case.

What are you even saying?

How can the supreme court not issue order to FG to issue to CBN?

How is cbn independent to the point where it is exempt from obeying court orders? Where is that in the constitution?

Is inec not independent? Can the supreme court grant an order to inec in a case brought to it concerning inec?

Is DSS independent? Can the supreme court grant an order to inec in a case brought to it concerning DSS?

Freebills12:
[color=#000099][/color]

The Supreme Court cannot issue order to FG to issue to CBN because CBN is an independent body even though it is answerable to the FG. CBN should have been a party to the case. It's just like taking election related matters to court without involving the INEC as a party to case.

Has the President not been directing the CBN on what to do? The President directed the last extension as confirmed by CBN Governor and also directed this current extensions now through a national address. Haba.

Likewise the President is bound to obey the Supreme Court totally until that order is vacated. This is basic law. Any other thing is politics. Let's stop fooling ourselves to determine which order to obey or not to obey.

The President should be listening to his VP who luckily is a Professor and SAN on constitutional issues. You can see how Kanu Agabi, representing the Attorney General dodged the issue of non compliance of FGN with the Supreme Court order. He knows the implications

lexy2014:


This one is just contradicting himself.

If the president supercedes all, who now has the power to deem his actions and orders "grossly unconstitutional"?

The legislature has the power to ensure the president doesn't misuse his powers. However, in this particular subject of discussion, the president's speech and order supercedes the supreme court.

More reason why everyone took Buhari's decision as regards the old #200 than the supreme court judgement. This simply means the supreme court exercise including the adjourn Feb 22 case is fruitless and in vain

NwokoloOwa:


Has the President not been directing the CBN on what to do? Likewise the President is bound to obey the Supreme Court totally under that order is vacated. This is basic law. Any other thing is politics.

Bros this thing you just said applies only in a sane country. For the president to obey the supreme court? Nah e no go fit happen for Nigeria.

StrongAlphMale:


The guy below you have given you the perfect answer.

The supreme court shouldn't have taken up the case, their efforts is now exercise in vain. In the executive list, monetary policy is there and this means the president's speech and order supercedes the supreme court by far

Why should "The supreme court not have taken up the case" and how is "their efforts is now exercise in vain"?

Can you show me where it is in the constitution where the supreme court canadjudicate on some matters and cannot adjudicate on others?

When you make reference to executive list and monetary policy, how does that preclude the supreme court from adjudicating on it? What are the other lists in the constitution?

Are you confusing yourself? Is it like you don't know the difference between tiers of govt and organs/arms of govt?

How does executive list mean that the president's speech and order supercedes the supreme court by far?

press9jatv:
In the first place the Supreme Court of justice shouldn’t have entertain the Elrufai and the clueless loser aggrieved Governor’s suits. APC and Tinubu will be heavily shamed and disgrace in the upcoming presidential poll. February 25th presidential poll is here. Tinubu ti lule piiii piiii. Presidential order supersede joor. APC has been destroyed and it will continue to be destroyed in this nation. You suffered Nigerians for complete 8 years and you are still talking here. You this clueless APC Governor’s that’s not with Buhari on the cbn policies will be highly dealt with. The clueless Elrufai too on which he’s their ring leader in this clueless rants will be the scapegoat of this upcoming election. You think Nigerians are joking niiii. Elrufai will be dealt with for not obeying Buhari order. All your wailing will never hold any water. Tinubu and you guys ti lule piii piii

Orbiter dictum

tete7000:
What a way for apc to end. I had always known that apc will fall apart disgracefully. It is a party built on lies and propaganda and nothing built on lies stands.

Only the Abuja cabal is ending

StrongAlphMale:


The legislature has the power to ensure the president doesn't misuse his powers. However, in this particular subject of discussion, the president's speech and order supercedes the supreme court.

More reason why everyone took Buhari's decision as regards the old #200 than the supreme court judgement. This simply means the supreme court exercise including the adjourn Feb 22 case is fruitless and in vain

That isn't what I asked. Let's try again.

If the president supercedes all, who now has the power to deem his actions and orders "grossly unconstitutional"?

How does the "president's speech and order supercedes the supreme court"? Based on which law?

Some of you are so confident in your ignorance

BluntCrazeMan:
There is something here.


We all know that the CBN is answerable to the FG, but it is independent of the FG.

In the suit filed against the FG by those states, they didn't include the CBN as part of the defendants.

Thus, they have absolutely nothing to do with that particular suit in question.. Even though they were part of the main reasons the suit existed in the first place.

So, you're saying that the Supreme-Court is very right is issuing orders to them??



Something like,, Mr.-A took Mr.-B to court (say, a high-court) for an issue that concerned them both..
But somehow, the court needed Mr.-C (who never knew anything about the court-case) to stay indoors for one-week, regardless of his personal engagements.

If the Court gives such orders to Mr.-C, while the suit between Mr.-A and Mr.-B continued, is the court doing the right thing?
Should Mr.-C refute such orders (by maybe, trying to appeal in a higher court)??

What if Mr. C is answerable to Mr b, what if Mr. C takes orders from Mr. B? So it's not wrong to take Mr b to court since I know whatever I decide for Mr. B would bind on Mr. C. Meaning your analogy here might not stand.

BluntCrazeMan:
**(NOTE: A “SUPREME-COURT-ORDER” IS TOTALLY DIFFERENT FROM “SUPREME-COURT-JUDGEMENT”, EITHER IN SUBSTANCE OR IN AUTHORITY..)


So, let us go straight to the series of Questions...

1. Between a “Supreme-Court Order” and a “Presidential Address”, which one supersedes the other??


2. Between a “Supreme-Court Judgement” and an “Executive Order” by the President, which one supersedes the other??

3. Between the powers and authorities of the Judicial Arm of Government, and those of the Executive Arm of Government, which one supersedes the other??



I'm here to learn more about the interpretation of the constitution with regards to the powers that be.

Supreme Court of course especially if it has acted within the constitution of the country.

We are in democracy for crying out loud.

In law, when a precedent is set, it will be used as a point of reference for similar events in future. This country should avoid anarchy.

Otherwise, Presidents in Nigeria will abuse their office and turn themselves into tin gods.

lexy2014:


The supreme court gave an order that all naira notes should remain legal tender pending the February 20 when it will hear the case. So the governors are acting within the ambit of the law

The supreme court should not have inserted itself.

My response was to the question of the Governor's giving same executive orders on currency.

The supreme court I will not debate further.

lexy2014:


Why should "The supreme court not have taken up the case" and how is "their efforts is now exercise in vain"?

Can you show me where it is in the constitution where the supreme court canadjudicate on some matters and cannot adjudicate on others?

When you make reference to executive list and monetary policy, how does that preclude the supreme court from adjudicating on it? What are the other lists in the constitution?

Are you confusing yourself? Is it like you don't know the difference between tiers of govt and organs/arms of govt?

How does executive list mean that the president's speech and order supercedes the supreme court by far?

It's simple son, whatever judgement the supreme court will give on Feb 22 is already effort in vain since buhari has already said only old #200 should be used.

Now imagine the supreme court orders that All Old naira notes should still be used till further notice whereby contradicting what the president said, who do you think people will listen to? Everyone will of course follow the president's speech and not the supreme court.

Ordinarily in a sane country, everybody ties of government is expected to function independently but it can never happen in Nigeria.

Lastly, I'm sure you don't know what executive list means nor the things written on the executive list. Kindly use Google and educate yourself as regards to this

NwokoloOwa:
The Supreme Court is the highest arbiter in the country. The Courts interpet the law. Not the Executive, not the Legislature. A court judgement is a process, its a marathon, not a dash. In between that process their are orders, rulings, etc.on various aspects of the case. This is so, so that all parties are given opportunity to present their own side of the case. This is clear to all countries practicing democracy and even so monarchies.

The Supreme Court was clear on the interim order granted on the Naira redesign. The President just disobeyed a valid court order for reasons that are not explainable. Its unfortunate.

I blame the AGF for not advising the president properly except the president has a hidden agenda because the so called big men have access to this money maybe not in the quantity they would want.

Eketem:


The supreme court should not have inserted itself.

My response was to the question of the Governor's giving same executive orders on currency.

The supreme court I will not debate further.

How did the supreme court "insert" itself? Are you sure you even know what you are talking about?

Did the supreme court give an order or not?

Are the parties in the suit obligated to obey that order?

StrongAlphMale:


It's simple son, whatever judgement the supreme court will give on Feb 22 is already effort in vain since buhari has already said only old #200 should be used.

Now imagine the supreme court orders that All Old naira notes should still be used till further notice whereby contradicting what the president said, who do you think people will listen to? Everyone will of course follow the president's speech and not the supreme court.

Ordinarily in a sane country, everybody ties of government is expected to function independently but it can never happen in Nigeria.

Lastly, I'm sure you don't know what executive list means nor the things written on the executive list. Kindly use Google and educate yourself as regards to this

Offpoint. Pls answer the following questions.

1. Why should "The supreme court not have taken up the case" and how is "their efforts is now exercise in vain"?

2. Can you show me where it is in the constitution where the supreme court canadjudicate on some matters and cannot adjudicate on others?

3. When you make reference to executive list and monetary policy, how does that preclude the supreme court from adjudicating on it? What are the other lists in the constitution?

4. Are you confusing yourself? Is it like you don't know the difference between tiers of govt and organs/arms of govt?

5. How does executive list mean that the president's speech and order supercedes the supreme court by far?

lexy2014:


How did the supreme court "insert" itself? Are you sure you even know what you are talking about?

Did the supreme court give an order or not?

Are the parties in the suit obligated to obey that order?

Again my response was on the governor's.
Rest.

Eketem:


The supreme court should not have inserted itself.

My response was to the question of the Governor's giving same executive orders on currency.

The supreme court I will not debate further.

That guy called Lexy2014 loves to argue and the dude is arguing blindly.

Just like what everyone else has been saying, the supreme court shouldn't have taken up the case. Whatever judgement they give on Feb 22 will automatically become a laughing stuff, as no one would take them serious.

Even governors gave an executive order as regards the usage of the currency.

That guy just dey argue unnecessarily, but e go shock am by Feb 22 when supreme court might have even thrown out the case

Eketem:


Again my response was on the governor's.
Rest.

My response is on your response. Over to you

How did the supreme court "insert" itself? Are you sure you even know what you are talking about?

Did the supreme court give an order or not?

Are the parties in the suit obligated to obey that order?

lexy2014:


Offpoint. Pls answer the following questions.

1. Why should "The supreme court not have taken up the case" and how is "their efforts is now exercise in vain"?

2. Can you show me where it is in the constitution where the supreme court canadjudicate on some matters and cannot adjudicate on others?

3. When you make reference to executive list and monetary policy, how does that preclude the supreme court from adjudicating on it? What are the other lists in the constitution?

4. Are you confusing yourself? Is it like you don't know the difference between tiers of govt and organs/arms of govt?

5. How does executive list mean that the president's speech and order supercedes the supreme court by far?

You're asking useless questions. Oga go back and read the reply I gave you and gain wisdom.

Can't you see you're the one arguing blindly here? You seriously need to educate yourself more by using Google and avoid asking unnecessarily questions

StrongAlphMale:


That guy called Lexy2014 loves to argue and the dude is arguing blindly.

Just like what everyone else has been saying, the supreme court shouldn't have taken up the case. Whatever judgement they give on Feb 22 will automatically become a laughing stuff, as no one would take them serious.

Even governors gave an executive order as regards the usage of the currency.

That guy just dey argue unnecessarily, but e go shock am by Feb 22 when supreme court might have even thrown out the case

Can you show me the argument you say I have argued?

Does the supreme court "take up cases" or cases are brought before the supreme court? Do you know the difference between the two?

Are there any cases which the supreme court is exempted from entertaining by law?

Eketem:


Again my response was on the governor's.
Rest.

You better stop responding to that guy. I can see that he is here for irrelevant argument. Kindly Ignore him

AfricanColumbus:
Nothing supercedes a presidential executive order. It can only be revoked by the president himself if it is deemed to be grossly unconstitutional.

Presidential executive orders are final.


For the number 3 question, the executive and judiciary are equal, but the head of the executive (president) supercedes all in the land.

I’m sure you stated all these out of sheer ignorance or possibly selfishness. Let me refer you to the basics. Go pick up any secondary school government textbook and read carefully the content of the topic “separation of powers”. It is crystal clear that the Judiciary when making “Judicial Reviews” can declare any law made by the legislative arm or policy made by the executive that contravenes the constitution itself which is the “grundnorm” as “ultra-vires, null and void with no effect or whatsoever “. Please seek knowledge on issues before you delve into them next time. Some of us are students of history, politics and law.

lexy2014:


Can you show me the argument you say I have argued?

Does the supreme court "take up cases" or cases are brought before the supreme court? Do you know the difference between the two?

Are there any cases which the supreme court is exempted from entertaining by law?

Your father would be in a better position to argue with you on this son. I'm done with you. This is my last response to you

abimic:


What if Mr. C is answerable to Mr b, what if Mr. C takes orders from Mr. B? So it's not wrong to take Mr b to court since I know whatever I decide for Mr. B would bind on Mr. C. Meaning your analogy here might not stand.

You have not convinced me yet.


The order for Mr.-C to stay indoors..
Whereas the judgement had not been passed on Mr.-B yet
(that is, even if it is assumed that Mr.-C takes orders from Mr.-B)

Can Orders from nowhere fall on top of Mr.-C??

StrongAlphMale:


You're asking useless questions. Oga go back and read the reply I gave you and gain wisdom.

Can't you see you're the one arguing blindly here? You seriously need to educate yourself more by using Google and avoid asking unnecessarily questions

Offpoint. Where is the argument? When did questions become argument? So you can't even differentiate between questions and argument and you say you have wisdom?

Kindly educate me by using your Google to answer the following questions as enumerated below.

1. Why should "The supreme court not have taken up the case" and how is "their efforts is now exercise in vain"?

2. Can you show me where it is in the constitution where the supreme court canadjudicate on some matters and cannot adjudicate on others?

3. When you make reference to executive list and monetary policy, how does that preclude the supreme court from adjudicating on it? What are the other lists in the constitution?

4. Are you confusing yourself? Is it like you don't know the difference between tiers of govt and organs/arms of govt?

5. How does executive list mean that the president's speech and order supercedes the supreme court by far?

StrongAlphMale:


Your father would be in a better position to argue with you on this son. I'm done with you. This is my last response to you

You are getting emotional. It's expected.

Can you show me the argument you say I have argued?

Does the supreme court "take up cases" or cases are brought before the supreme court? Do you know the difference between the two?

Are there any cases which the supreme court is exempted from entertaining by law?

lexy2014:


That isn't what I asked. Let's try again.

If the president supercedes all, who now has the power to deem his actions and orders "grossly unconstitutional"?

How does the "president's speech and order supercedes the supreme court"? Based on which law?

Some of you talk are so confident in your ignorance

That's Nigerians for you. Everybody is an expert in things they have little or no knowledge about. Unfortunately, they don't like to learn and heed to correction.