Stats: 3,187,430 members, 7,932,404 topics. Date: Tuesday, 27 August 2024 at 06:21 AM |
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Politics / Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court (29736 Views)
Ihedioha To Storm Okorocha’s Estate With “Citizens" / Ihedioha To Sign Order On TSA As Imo Uncovers 250 Accounts Operated By Okorocha / Okorocha Urges Ihedioha To Continue Free Education, Keep Alive His 1000 Projects (2) (3) (4)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (Reply) (Go Down)
Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by Racoon(m): 1:00am On Mar 01, 2020 |
Ahead of the Supreme Court hearing of his application on Monday, March 2, the former governor of Imo state, Emeka Ihedioha, has told the court that the facts and circumstances of his application are different and distinguishable from the one filed by the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its candidate, David Lyon, with respect to the Bayelsa State governorship election. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sunnewsonline.com/why-my-case-is-different-from-bayelsa-ihedioha-tells-supreme-court/amp/. 8 Likes 2 Shares
|
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by IsaacRocks(m): 1:01am On Mar 01, 2020 |
Ftc Mtcheew all this people self. 2 Likes |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by Sunnymatey(m): 1:08am On Mar 01, 2020 |
Jst arrange your N60m come monday. 78 Likes 5 Shares |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by donpapa(m): 1:09am On Mar 01, 2020 |
![]() |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by Racoon(m): 1:10am On Mar 01, 2020 |
“That the failure to state the results of the other 68 candidates that participated in the election in the disputed 388 polling units while the 1st appellant/ respondent’s (Uzodinma) admission under cross-examination of allocating to himself more votes than the total registered voters in the identified units are all manifest on the face of the record of the Supreme Court. 18 Likes 1 Share
|
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by Racoon(m): 1:11am On Mar 01, 2020 |
The Imo case is clear case of judicial injustice hence a culdesac the supreme court must redeem itself from. 79 Likes 7 Shares |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by kahal29: 3:00am On Mar 01, 2020 |
If this is what is contained in Ihedioha's application for review then the amount of FINE he is going to pay tomorrow has just increased. The Supreme Court cannot RE-LITIGATE . The Supreme Court do not permit litigants who failed to diligently prosecute their case to re-litigate their appeals, under the euphemism of application for review Ihedioha and his team of audio lawyers failed to put up a good defense at the trial stage only to wake up from their slumber after the Supreme Court have given judgement. This evidence they are challenging now was not challenged at the lower court by his lawyers now they want to turn Supreme Court to a trial court. Justice Kekerekun had this to say 19 Likes 4 Shares
|
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by kahal29: 3:02am On Mar 01, 2020 |
Racoon: Redeem what? Just package 100 million for Hope tomorrow. 29 Likes 2 Shares |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by CanadaOrBust: 3:22am On Mar 01, 2020 |
kahal29: Here is what I don’t understand about people like u: Can’t u forget having a sentimental favorite for a second, and just step back and broadly look at what it is u r supporting?? Can’t u see that if this embarrassment of a judgement is let stand it diminishes every Nigerian including you yourself? Because it blatantly rewards clear cheating and forgery that even kids can tell is cheating and forgery. How can u teach children about not cheating when they can see for themselves that the final court in the land rewards cheating and forgery?? Also, at the very least, it greatly reduces your ability to have a say in who governs u because it allows for any ruling party to “win” any election it wishes, which will inevitably lead to a one-party country. A Supreme Court overrules all lower courts plus INEC in order to replace an 8-month gov with a 4th place finisher, all based on clearly fraudulent documents. And here u are, gloating about it! Anyway, whatever happens, the leaders of thought in the country and international community are watching the case. They understand what is at stake and have made their positions clear. ————————————————- Nobel Laureate, Prof. Wole Soyinka, Prof. Pat Utomi, Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar, leadership of the Nigerian Bar Association, others, to monitor Supreme Court Imo judgement review. Ihedioha Vs Uzodinma: Civil Society Leaders Urge Supreme Court To Reverse Judgment BY SAHARAREPORTERS, FEB 11, 2020 Leaders of civil society in Nigeria have asked the Supreme Court to set aside its judgment pronouncing Hope Uzodinma as duly elected governor of Imo State... The group posited that the court erred in its judgment and faulted the process through which the apex court arrived at the decision. In the statement signed by Dr Olusegun Awe Obe, the Concerned Leaders of Thought and Conscience in Project Nigeria, highlighted reasons the court should not have pronounced Uzodinma as winner of the election... 64 Likes 4 Shares |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by Nobody: 3:28am On Mar 01, 2020 |
Ihedioha has a good case if presented well. I wish him good luck. 47 Likes 4 Shares |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by kahal29: 3:30am On Mar 01, 2020 |
CanadaOrBust: Oga no need for plenty talk........ Just dey arrange the 100 million fine una go pay tomorrow 35 Likes 1 Share |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by kahal29: 3:31am On Mar 01, 2020 |
J111333: He has no case but a HUGE FINE awaits him tomorrow. 33 Likes 1 Share |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by CanadaOrBust: 3:49am On Mar 01, 2020 |
kahal29: All newspapers in the country are also watching and many have noted what a travesty Imo is. I don’t see how the SC can let the judgment stand and still look Nigerians in the eye: The following is from the actual summary of trial materials as presented in a major reputable newspaper. Pay special attention to the bolded. ———————————————- That Supreme Court Magic Judgment This Day (Lagos) 17 FEBRUARY 2020 ... According to summary of trial materials, no ward collation agent was called to show that at the collation center results were brought from the 388 polling units where the alleged exclusion took place... The petitioner, rather called 28 polling unit agents who came to identify some of the results tendered by the petitioner from the bar. All the electoral documents were tendered from the bar and thus dumped on the court without anybody giving evidence correlating the contents of the result forms with the tabulation done by the petitioner himself. Each of the 18 polling unit agents under cross-examination, manifested ignorance of the contents of the documents and never convinced anybody of being present in their claimed polling units... Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had in their reply to the petition disowned those result sheets and averred emphatically that NO RESULTS WERE GENERATED from those polling units as elections in those polling units were cancelled by presiding officers as a result of violence, over voting, snatching of electoral materials, etc. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) stated that any result from those polling units presented by any of the candidates, in this case, the petitioners, must be fake. When confronted with the purported result sheets tendered by the petitioners, each of the witnesses admitted as follows: i. The names and signatures of the Presiding Officers are not well found on those results. ii. The names and signatures of other party agents did not appear on the result sheets, neither could they mention even one party agent of the other political parties in those booths. iii. The result sheets do not contain the total number of ballot papers used and number of ballot papers unused or invalid. The scores of political parties are not clear on the face of the documents. Based on the above, it appears the Supreme Court was desperately working to an answer in favour of the ruling party... and the only opening to do that was to accept the fictitious results of the 388 polling units willy-nilly. And instead of doing substantial justice on the matter, it ended up delivering one of judiciary's greatest infamies which even a kid learning arithmetic can see through. The judgment turned logic on its head, rewrote the basic universal laws of arithmetic and did grave and substantial injury to our democracy and the power of the people to choose who governs them. With this judicial precedent, the Supreme Court has inevitably rubber-stamped political rascality and the judgment could shape our democratic future. The court has widened the opening which politicians exploit and manipulate to get into elective offices. All one needs to do is to stay somewhere, maybe in one's room, probably with one policeman or so, write one's own results, submit to INEC for counting and if it refuses, don't worry, bid your time till you get to the court. With supreme arrogance, the final court of appeal will recognise the results as legitimate, credible and authentic and pronto, you will be declared duly elected. ...Even more perplexing was the fact that in some of the polling units, voter turnout was more than the registered voters. How is this possible? In Uzodinma's result sheets, there was no voided vote and only two parties, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and APC participated and were reflected in the election results of the 388 polling units. Yet, 70 political parties participated in that election and were all reflected in the INEC declared results of other polling units all over the state. ..,Does it mean that other parties such as All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), Action Alliance (AA), etc., did not participate in the election in those 388 polling units contrary to INEC's results in other areas of the state? Why did the result sheets reflect only two parties when so many parties participated in the said election? Apparently, Senator Uzodinma concocted those results that fly in the face of the basic laws of arithmetic and common sense between the PDP and the APC after the fact that the PDP had won the election and he only scored his party a vote figure higher than the PDP vote. The corollary to that is that if it was any other party that was on the cusp of victory, Uzodinma's results would have been between just the APC and that party! Yet our almighty Supreme Court glossed over all these fundamental anomalies in Uzodinma's result sheets which had been rejected by even INEC... and accepted same as authentic. A further assessment of the result sheets of the disputed 388 polling units showed that the said units are all in the Orlu Senatorial Zone where Uzodinma and the candidate of the Action Alliance Ugwumba Uche Nwosu come from. So even if the 388 polling units were concentrated mostly in Uzodinma's ancestral home, surely, Nwosu who emerged second in the March 9, 2019 election in Imo State and was backed by the incumbent governor at the time, Rochas Okorocha, his father in-law, must have amassed some votes from the units. But these votes were curiously missing, for the simple reason that they forged the results, and very badly at that. Furthermore, Uzodinma of the APC scored an average of 98% of the total votes cast in the 388 units, whereas he scored an average of 13% in the remaining polling units in the state. How could this be? Why was it that it was only in these 388 units throughout the state that the voter turnout was either more than the registered voters or achieved 98 to 100 percent of the registered voters? Please note that emphasis is NOT on the number of accredited voters which is usually far less than the number of registered voters. Uzodinma's fake results validated by our Supreme Court defy reason. The pattern of the results from the disputed 388 polling units clearly shows the improbability of such an occurrence. And on the basis of the testimony of one policeman, and 28 discredited polling units' agents who gave contradictory statements at trial, the Supreme Court accepted the results. In declaring Uzodinma governor of Imo State, the Supreme Court simply annulled a valid mandate freely given to an individual and transferred it to another person who came fourth in the election. 38 Likes 4 Shares |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by Cmanforall: 4:11am On Mar 01, 2020 |
Interesting month for legal practitioners 1 Like |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by kahal29: 5:13am On Mar 01, 2020 |
CanadaOrBust: You mean induced media opinions and write ups? Don't worry by tomorrow your eyes will clear. 13 Likes 1 Share |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by helinues: 5:22am On Mar 01, 2020 |
The case that's already been thrown in the dustbin.. There was possible collusion btw Ihedioha and some INEC officials to deiberately deduct Hope's votes.. 8 Likes |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by 9jafunny: 5:29am On Mar 01, 2020 |
imo case is highly critical 3 Likes 2 Shares |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by Racoon(m): 5:35am On Mar 01, 2020 |
kahal29:No need for that yet.The supreme court judgement on Imo is still a clear case of wrong judicial indecision that even the apex court justices are thoroughly ashame of even if they cant openly admit it.It will set a legal precedence that will forever hunt them in histroy. 26 Likes |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by Racoon(m): 5:40am On Mar 01, 2020 |
helinues:And why is no other participating party countering that assertion? Are you not worried that Hope Uzodinma only allocated incongruent and unimaginable number of votes to himself alone in all the alleged 388 polling units? 3 Likes |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by helinues: 5:46am On Mar 01, 2020 |
Racoon: Why did INEC intentionally deduct Uzodinma votes in 388 polling units? The SC judges that sacked Ihedioha are not drunk. 17 Likes 1 Share |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by Wiseandtrue(f): 5:49am On Mar 01, 2020 |
Any right thinking judge knows that Ihedioha has a case!!! He did no wrong, as a citizen, he has the right to appeal the great injustice and his mandate which was BOLDLY snatched from him!!! Restore the hope of the masses in the judiciary, do the right thing!!! History never forgets!!! 18 Likes 1 Share |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by Staro: 6:53am On Mar 01, 2020 |
Hope Uzodinma obviously obtained this judgement by fraud. If the Supreme Court is fair and firm, this judgement should be reversed while Hope Uzodinma is banned from politics for 10yrs. This judgement must not stand ! 31 Likes |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by BUSINESSARENAA(m): 7:39am On Mar 01, 2020 |
OKOOO |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by Racoon(m): 9:42am On Mar 01, 2020 |
helinues:False! INEC have explained that it was forced to cancel election in those disputed areas because of electoral irregularities & affirmed it up to the national headquarters. So why is Uzodinma faulting? Was he the only candidate affected that he have to turn out incredulous vote figures in those same areas? Why does supreme court have to rely on police evidence when the electoral umpire have given its verdict? Same issue happened during Osun rerun & presidential election but the supreme court said they can depend on hearsay evidence except what INEC says or publish.So does it not worry you same supreme court is now doing a volte face? Imo supreme court judgement is a hatchet job gone wrong. 10 Likes |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by Racoon(m): 9:46am On Mar 01, 2020 |
Furthermore, Uzodinma of the APC scored an average of 98% of the total votes cast in the 388 units, whereas he scored an average of 13% in the remaining polling units in the state. How could this be? Why was it that it was only in these 388 units throughout the state that the voter turnout was either more than the registered voters or achieved 98 to 100 percent of the registered voters? 3 Likes |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by money121(m): 9:55am On Mar 01, 2020 |
Ok |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by PureGoldh(m): 9:55am On Mar 01, 2020 |
Noted...Let the best man win Asap |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by tsephanyah(f): 9:55am On Mar 01, 2020 |
Wow! The judiciary are against APC because of EFCC raiding and arresting corrupt judges and lawyers 1 Like
|
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by ChaseVibes(m): 9:56am On Mar 01, 2020 |
Nawa
|
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by morikee: 9:56am On Mar 01, 2020 |
E go shock you when them fine you and your lawyers. Awon litigants. 4 Likes 1 Share |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by anonymous1759(m): 9:57am On Mar 01, 2020 |
... What happened in Bayelsa will repeat itself. Pride won't allow the supreme Court to over turn the judgment. Pdp lawyers didn't do their home work well during the defense at the Supreme Court. Same fate that played during Trumps trial. When the House didn't do the needful and expect the Senate to do their homework. The Senate took advantage of it and blocked additional calling of witnesses . They backed their decision with the law and some Nigerians supported it because they like Trump. But I won't be surprised if they rain insults on Tanko tomorrow if he backed his stance with law and refuses to over turn the judgment. APC negligence made them loose Bayelsa state, that's the same way PDP lawyers will make them loose because they failed to represent their case at the supreme Court before the judgment was made. I don't see any miracle happening tomorrow this will serve as a deterrent to lawyers and Party chairmen to do their home work. 11 Likes |
Re: Why Imo Case Is Different From Bayelsa, Ihedioha To Supreme Court by Gmaloo: 9:58am On Mar 01, 2020 |
Na wa |
Photos From The Suicide Bomb Blast In Adamawa State Yesterday / South African Police Shoot IPOB Protesters With Rubber Bullets / I Didn't Apologise To Buhari, Jonathan, Igbo Elders- Nnamdi Kalu (daily Sun)
(Go Up)
Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 120 |