Entry Instance

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 562512,
    "url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/562512/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 165,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Kaluma",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 1565,
        "legal_name": "George Peter Opondo Kaluma",
        "slug": "george-peter-opondo-kaluma"
    },
    "content": "under Article 115 at Clause 11A. It is not just a sub-clause. The President is proposing whole new provisions entirely unconnected to what has already gone through the parliamentary processes to the point of it being presented to him. As you define ‘reservations’, I wish to alert the House that when you do a Bill, there is usually what we call the ‘mischief rule’, the intention of the law. It may be captured by just one provision. How much can the President - and I know you will rule on this - propose in terms of new provisions to a Bill if he were to have that power? I am saying ‘if he were’ because in my solid legal belief, I do not believe ‘reservations’ permit the President to have a legislative section somewhere in State House crafting a whole provision of a Bill for Parliament to pass. Lastly, as you consider that, still under Article 115(1)(b), would you also define in your Communication to the House what the limit of reconsideration is? The law says if the President has issues with a Bill presented to him for assent, he will refer it back to Parliament for reconsideration. The question is: What is to be reconsidered by Parliament? Is it the Bill presented to the President with his reservations, which in my understanding are just concerns? Is the President saying: “I have a concern with this particular provision in this direction, can you reconsider it?” Or is it new legislative proposals coming from the Executive to be considered in that process?"
}