Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 695123,
    "url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/695123/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 1254,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir. To demonstrate this intentional violation is, for instance, when it comes to the appointment of the County Executive Committee (CEC) members as provided under Section 35, the appointments have not been subjected to the approval of the Assembly, yet that is a mandatory requirement of Section 35 and this has been going on for the longest time. That situation is designed to circumvent the requirement for approval so that we can continually have persons serving who did not necessarily have to be approved by the Assembly, yet Section 35 of the County Governments Act is critical. When you fail to appoint chief officers in line with Section 45 of the County Government Act yet you know as the Governor that you are supposed to appoint and subject those appointees to the ratification and approval of the Assembly, then by design and intentionally, you circumvent the requirement of Section 44. When Section 30 Sub-section (2)(g) of the County Governments Act says one of the functions of the County Governor is to assent to Bills, and we have attached bills being forwarded to the Governor and the Governor does not assent to those Bills, neither does he return a memorandum to set out why he cannot assent to those bills, then it is a clear demonstration of an intentional violation of Section 30 of the County Governments Act. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, when the Assembly passes a resolution that a member of the County Executive, the County Secretary does, not meet the academic qualifications to serve as a County Secretary, and as we have shown in our documents the resolution is passed on to the Governor, under Section 40 the Governor has no discretion. In fact the word is: “Upon receipt of a resolution by the Assembly recommending that that person be dismissed, the Governor shall---.” That recommendation was sent this year in June to the Governor and, until today, three months down the line, nothing is done. That is a clear intentional violation of a section of the Constitution. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, when the County, Budget and Economic Forum, a very important body that facilitates public participation in budget making process, the Governor does not initiate the process of constitution of this body since that government came into place and we are now just a few months to the next election. It is him who initiates this process. Then failure to do that can only be a violation of Section 137 of the Public Finance Management Act. There has been an admission and I say this because one of the violations in respect of the composition of the County Executive is on gender. Article 175 of the Constitution makes it mandatory and what you heard is that we are aware but just pardon us because we did not quite have a big pool of people from whom to select. I am not aware of any provision in the County Governments Act that says that if you are to make appointment on an acting capacity, you are only limited to the pool of the chief officers that you already have in office. So, that is a deliberate violation of that section of the Constitution. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, Section 48 (1)(b) of the County Government Act sets out the sub-counties which are supposed to be as per the constituencies you have within the County. We saw eight sub-county administrators appointed and you have additional two sub-counties created outside the provision of Section 48. Fine, the reason could be noble. However, it must be that The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposes only. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor, Senate."
}