Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 716746,
    "url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/716746/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 578,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Ndiema",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 1067,
        "legal_name": "Henry Tiole Ndiema",
        "slug": "henry-tiole-ndiema"
    },
    "content": "thank you, Mr. Chairman, Sir for the opportunity to say something. The issue that we are discussing here of a complementary, I think if it had been handled differently, we would not have had all this. Electronic systems fail and when they do not work, we may revert to the manual system. During the last elections, the electronic system refused to show my name until they went to the manual back up and they went to the Biometric Voter Register (BVR) and I finally voted after eight hours. I think the choice of the word “complementary” is what is bringing a problem. If we had put a word which says ‘contingency’ or even say ‘contingency manual system’, there would have been no problem. Why are we running away from addressing the facts? In my own understanding of complementary, it means they run together. This is likely to cause confusion. If it was a second tier way of sorting a situation, it would have been better. The way it is, some people may interpret that they will run together while others understand that it is for emergency cases. For electronic voting, you do not; it is a complementary because the Act as it is now provides for electronic. Even if you have to give back up for 10 times, it is allowed. So, I do not think what was meant there was electronic but manual. Mr. Chairman, Sir, I am disappointed that the Committee did not arrive at a compromise that would have provided for manual system because in reality, electronics systems do fail. Even aircrafts fail. Even vehicles fail and we are forced to walk."
}