Timothy

[Timothy @_timtek]

@piotersan @visegrad24 Coping mechanism.

[Timothy @_timtek]

@BobYangEngineer @Sagiel_X @visegrad24 It is either you are born daft or choose to be one on purpose. Are the both ventures you mentioned the only venture yielding for him?
Even though they are, who told you that they only turns around $15 billion yearly?
Do you even know what a networth is?

[Timothy @_timtek]

@PrinceAdediran5 @Scintypop @UkomahM @OgarEmmaOwogeka Another Yoruba Gaybriel🤮

[Timothy @_timtek]

Written by a BASTARD as usual.

[Emmanuel O. Ogar Esq @OgarEmmaOwogeka]

PETER OBI DO NOT HAVE ANY REPUTATION TO PROTECT: Here is why;
As a lawyer, I find the defamation suit reportedly instituted by @PeterObi against @realkenokonkwo rather curious and difficult to appreciate from a strategic standpoint. The essence of a defamation action is the protection of a reputation that has been unjustly damaged. However, where a public figure has been subjected to prolonged public criticism, political scrutiny, and widespread debate over their actions and statements, the practical challenge becomes demonstrating that the alleged defamatory statements have caused a fresh and measurable injury to an already contested public image.

Does Peter Obi even have any reputation to protect? I doubt he has any reputation to be defamed. Reputation is not what a person value himself but what others value him. Peter Obi is banking enforcing a reputation that is long dead, therefore an action like this is laughable.

In a democracy, political figures inevitably expose themselves to intense criticism, and the law of defamation must be carefully balanced against the constitutional right to freedom of expression. The courts are not intended to become venues for settling every political disagreement or silencing harsh opinions.

Nevertheless, whether the action succeeds or fails ultimately depends on the specific words complained of, whether they are statements of fact or opinion, their truth or falsity, whether they were published to third parties, and whether they have lowered the claimant in the estimation of right-thinking members of society.

Let me emphasize it here again, right-thinking members of the society does not include members of the OBIDIENTS movement.

E. O. Ogar, Esq.

[Timothy @_timtek]

@_OgonnaDaniel @Elkrosmediahub @Dera_king00 Hmmm
My take is that I don't see Peter Obi winning this election despite whatever tactic he may deploy. This is from a place of sincerity to one's self.

[Timothy @_timtek]

@abiola_bg @olajumokeokenla But she said NO. And I think her decision should be respected.

[Timothy @_timtek]

@MCN_Enigma Take me out of this country, NOW!

[Timothy @_timtek]

Tweets like without digging deep are characterized by a Nigerian. very disgusting IQ imbeciles.

[superdad @udysznx]

no allow poverty push you to the extent wey you go dey beg money from your younger siblings sha

[Timothy @_timtek]

@IU_Wakilii He should die there like a terrorist he is.

[Timothy @_timtek]

It all makes sense.

[𝑰𝒅𝒓𝒊𝒔 𝑨. 𝑶𝒏𝒊 PhD @IdrisAOni1]

Putting the Question of Sharīʿah in Yorùbá Land in Proper Perspective

Much of the controversy surrounding Sharīʿah in Yorùbá land is driven more by fear, misinformation and politics than by a proper understanding of what is actually being requested by Muslims.

The first point that must be clearly stated is that a full-fledged Sharīʿah legal system, in the sense of a comprehensive state-wide Islamic legal order governing criminal, civil and public affairs, is neither practical nor presently attainable in the multicultural and multi-religious context of Yorùbá land. The demographic realities, constitutional framework and religious diversity of the Southwest make such a project unrealistic.

Indeed, the overwhelming majority of Muslims advocating for Sharīʿah are not calling for the establishment of an Islamic state, nor are they demanding the replacement of existing constitutional structures with a comprehensive Islamic legal system.

What many Muslims have consistently requested is something far more limited, reasonable and constitutionally defensible: the opportunity to voluntarily access Islamic legal provisions in matters that directly concern their religious obligations and personal lives.

These include areas such as:

- Marriage and divorce.
- Inheritance and estate administration.
- Family disputes.
- Endowments (waqf).
- Contracts and certain aspects of personal transactions.
- Religious mediation and arbitration.

These are matters in which Muslims already believe they are religiously bound by Islamic teachings. The demand is therefore not for the imposition of Sharīʿah upon non-Muslims but for the accommodation of Muslims who voluntarily wish to regulate aspects of their personal affairs according to their faith.

This is neither unusual nor unprecedented.

Across the world, plural societies provide mechanisms through which religious communities can resolve personal and family matters according to their traditions, provided such arrangements operate within the framework of the law and with the consent of the parties involved.

Viewed from this perspective, Sharīʿah Panels are not instruments of domination but mechanisms of religious accommodation. They are comparable to mediation and arbitration systems through which citizens voluntarily seek guidance and dispute resolution based on shared values and beliefs.

The intense opposition to even these limited arrangements raises important questions.

If Christians may organise their affairs according to Christian principles, and if practitioners of traditional religion may organise aspects of their communal and religious lives according to their convictions, on what basis should Muslims be denied the opportunity to seek guidance on inheritance, marriage, divorce and related matters from institutions grounded in Islamic law?

To oppose a full Islamic legal state is one thing.

To oppose Muslims having access to voluntary Sharīʿah-based mediation and personal law mechanisms is something entirely different.

The latter begins to resemble a systematic denial of the legitimate religious rights of Muslims.

Equally troubling is the recurring attempt to portray every discussion about Sharīʿah as a "Fulani agenda" or an externally inspired project.

Such claims are historically inaccurate, intellectually weak and socially divisive.

Islam did not arrive in Yorùbá land through Fulani people.

Yorùbá Muslims are not recent converts.

They are indigenous sons and daughters of the soil whose ancestors have practised Islam for centuries.

The desire of a Yorùbá Muslim to distribute his estate according to Islamic inheritance law, contract his marriage according to Islamic principles or resolve family disputes according to Islamic teachings has nothing to do with Fulani nationalism, Fulani expansionism or any external ethnic agenda.

It is simply the desire of a believer to practise his religion.

1/2

[Timothy @_timtek]

@Blygn93 @storystagram @Unclechike1 Your spellings are disgusting.
What level of education did you attain?

[Timothy @_timtek]

@janeezeji17 @Unclechike1 Because we have self-hating bastards among us that keep deceiving themselves that there's progress in diversity.

[Timothy @_timtek]

@storystagram @Blygn93 @Unclechike1 Clock it 👌

[Timothy @_timtek]

@Blygn93 @Iam_bartholomew @Unclechike1 First thing, you, an animal, is not Igbo as your name states. Secondly, charlatans like you on social media do not speak for the so-called Niger Delta.

[Timothy @_timtek]

@Gsalvatore1 @chudy_jnr True

[Timothy @_timtek]

@ali_raisi1 @ShadowofEzra Go to hell,pedophile.

[Timothy @_timtek]

@InnahSadeey @ShadowPulse202 @MR__Sulaiman1 Get lost, please.

[Timothy @_timtek]

@melonmosque @Teemah433 @_raesparkles 🤡

[Timothy @_timtek]

@callmeadebay0 @Omoilorin001 And you never enter?

[Timothy @_timtek]

@Duke_of_Defi @dannwaneri @princeadeniyii 😂😂😂😂😅