Tanko Supreme Ice Cream knows all these.

HOPE is now INEC collation centre.

How he came to be in the possession of such sensitive materials was not questioned.

How else do snatched ballot boxes end up?

Alwaysachick:



I don't think so, they gave judgment with the supposed evidence.

PDP as at then had no case in court, so they didnt fault in any way. But its let for PDP now to proof beyond reasonable doubt that Hope's numbers were falsified.

The time for that has closed now, the Supreme Court has given its judgement and it can’t be reviewed or appealed!

Installing a staunch moslem with nepotic and ethnic tendencies will eventually ruin Nigeria both south west,east na south south....

That man will legalize ruga nd force it on everyone

Supreme court will be stupid to tell PDP Bayelsa that it's judgement cannot be reviewed but review Imo's own.

That will be grand Dumb Double Standard

Racoon:
The Imo case is clear case of judicial injustice hence a culdesac the supreme court must redeem itself from.

And you, a mere raccoon, knows more than the combined intellect and education of the justices of the supreme court...

Court case is not about "what it should have bn" rather, it is "what it is."

Emeka lost the judgement base on the mistakes of his lawyers.

If I bring in 10 allegations against you and you dwell on 7 out of the 3, the court will take it that you do not have defense for those three. That means that you are guilty of the 3 even if the Judge knows that you are not guilty of them.

Court cases are all about logic, argument and defense.

Supreme Court will still throw this case away and fine Emeka and his Lawyers.

Badguy89:


I am not a lawyer but please read this.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2020/02/29/imo-bayelsa-a-case-of-different-facts-disparate-circumstances/amp/

Secondly Ihedioha doesn't need new witnesses. Rather he is only showing the Supreme Court the judicial and constitutional blunders it committed. I haven't seen the judgement but how will an election hv more voters than the total registered voters.

The Supreme Court cannot review or debate its judgement it was clearly stated in the bayelsa case. The judge said “even if we review this case, if will open more reviews” meaning the case was not reviewed, it was just dismissed as will be ihediohas case. That that are entertaining the case is just to fulfill righteousness

Racoon:
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.

And you know this...how?!

Every two-bit broke ass is a lawyer these days

kahal29:






Oga no need for plenty talk........ Just dey arrange the 100 million fine una go pay tomorrow

smh!! I even thought you were going to put up an intelligent response to that guy quoting you, I didn't know you are another Zombie with empty head!!

In the end the Supreme Court judgement can’t be reviewed.

josite:
tomorrow supreme court will do the unthinkable.will recommend lawyers for disbarments.their names will be moved to be taken of the roll of lawyers.it will not be money fines.

Why exactly? Please educate me. I have been seeing 60m fines and all

[s]

tsephanyah:
Wow! The judiciary are against APC because of EFCC raiding and arresting corrupt judges and lawyers

[/s]

[s]

Afamed:
Supreme court and Apc definitely will be N2b richer tomorrow

[/s]

chigo4u:

The Supreme Court cannot review or debate its judgement it was clearly stated in the bayelsa case. The judge said “even if we review this case, if will open more reviews” meaning the case was not reviewed, it was just dismissed as will be ihediohas case. That that are entertaining the case is just to fulfill righteousness

The Supreme Court judgement also stated that the review was dismissed cos the application lacked merit. But imo's own is different,it's about the constitution. Besides I heard d Supreme Court has set aside it's own judgment in d past (1999). Anyway, by dis time tomorrow we go know hwfr.

Badguy89:


I am not a lawyer but please read this.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2020/02/29/imo-bayelsa-a-case-of-different-facts-disparate-circumstances/amp/

Secondly Ihedioha doesn't need new witnesses. Rather he is only showing the Supreme Court the judicial and constitutional blunders it committed. I haven't seen the judgement but how will an election hv more voters than the total registered voters.

You want the supreme court to accept her fault? That the court is not capable of sound judgment? You reason am na

Alwaysachick:



I don't think so, they gave judgment with the supposed evidence.

PDP as at then had no case in court, so they didnt fault in any way. But its let for PDP now to proof beyond reasonable doubt that Hope's numbers were falsified.

I agree entirely

Fergie

Badguy89:


The Supreme Court judgement also stated that the review was dismissed cos the application lacked merit. But imo's own is different,it's about the constitution. Besides I heard d Supreme Court has set aside it's own judgment in d past (1999). Anyway, by dis time tomorrow we go know hwfr.

The Supreme Court has never set aside its judgement except after a constitution review. Yes the bayelsa was dismissed because it lacked merit just as the Imo case tomorrow, if ihedioha judges were confident of their case, why are the tweaking it every other day, I’m predicting they would withdraw the case before the judgment tomorrow.

Racoon:


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sunnewsonline.com/why-my-case-is-different-from-bayelsa-ihedioha-tells-supreme-court/amp/.

. The Supreme court judgement is the final.....It is not the duty of the SC to compute the results of all candidates.INEC has the responsibility.... The previous decision is irreversible.

kahal29:






Oga no need for plenty talk........ Just dey arrange the 100 million fine una go pay tomorrow

Ignorance is a sin to human. The judgement of Supreme court is fun and right to you fool right.
The same court will manage your case one day anyway you are nobody from nowhere

linqzs:


You want the supreme court to accept her fault? That the court is not capable of sound judgment? You reason am na

But they hv done before

J111333:
Ihedioha has a good case if presented well.
I wish him good luck.

He has no case. Did he win the election in the first place?

Many hidden thing are in this

Openbusiness:

It's not about me being too sure or not too sure. It's about what the Supreme Court is and what it represents, the final arbiter! They delivered judgment and it is final, whether that judgment is correct or not. The Supreme Court cannot review a case it has already delivered judgment on. It could review another similar case in future that comes before it and deliver the correct thing, but this old case is a forgone issue. They already fined the APC lawyers 60m for daring to put the Supreme Court in a self-compromising position. They might drop a sledgehammer on PDP lawyers for not withdrawing the request for review after they set an example with those APC lawyers. Those guys will definitely get a stiffer penalty, so that no other lawyers will dare ask the Supreme Court for review of its judgment again. You wait and see

This is another case.

Badguy89:


The Supreme Court judgement also stated that the review was dismissed cos the application lacked merit. But imo's own is different,it's about the constitution. Besides I heard d Supreme Court has set aside it's own judgment in d past (1999). Anyway, by dis time tomorrow we go know hwfr.

The appeal is unmeritorious.it is bound to fail and has failed

chigo4u:

The time for that has closed now, the Supreme Court has given its judgement and it can’t be reviewed or appealed!

So what is tomorrow's meeting about?

Badguy89:


But they hv done before

Highest is a total rerun

CanadaOrBust:


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.

You ppl are ridiculous

Did Pdp win the election in Bayelsa?
Yet the SC jettison the people's mandate regardless and gave victory to the loser.
What happened to, " The candidate is only a representative of the party?"
Ameachi never contested but was given victory because his party won and he was the legitimate candidate of the party.
SC will not reverse it's verdict.
Since you people accept the Bayelsa and Zamfara verdict where Pdp clearly lost the people's mandate but was given victory, you ought to accept this too

Prepare your 100million naira fine for tomorrow.