HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, POST, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"count": 1608389,
"next": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/?format=api&page=137835",
"previous": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/?format=api&page=137833",
"results": [
{
"id": 1394751,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1394751/?format=api",
"text_counter": 469,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Ainabkoi, UDA",
"speaker_title": "Hon. Samwel Chepkonga",
"speaker": null,
"content": " The Members of Parliament are congregating to discuss the National Government Affirmative Action Fund (NGAAF). They just heard me discuss the NG-CDF. However, we are discussing the Houses of Parliament (Bicameral Relations) Bill. Third, the Bill seeks to define what constitutes consideration of a Bill for purposes of Article 110(3) of the Constitution. This has been very problematic. The Speakers have never known what actually constitutes a Bill under Article 110(3) of the Constitution. People have gone all the way to court to litigate this matter. In this piece of legislation, we seek to provide The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor"
},
{
"id": 1394752,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1394752/?format=api",
"text_counter": 470,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Ainabkoi, UDA",
"speaker_title": "Hon. Samwel Chepkonga",
"speaker": null,
"content": "a framework where there is a disagreement between the two Speakers; we constitute a mediation committee or conciliation committee to take advantage of Article 159(2)(c) of the Constitution. This is part of the implementation of Article 159(2)(c) of the Constitution, which provides various mechanisms for resolving disputes between persons and institutions, including reconciliation, mediation, and arbitration. We want a friendly mechanism to resolve disputes that arise between the Houses. Some of us have visited the Congress in the United States of America (USA). There is never a day the two Houses have litigated in court. In fact, when a matter is filed in court, the courts restrain themselves. They advise them to go and deal with their issues. That is what we are seeking to do, Hon. Temporary Speaker. We seek to resolve issues that are of concern to us. We are all Members of Parliament but of different Houses. We represent the people and the same interests. The Bill also seeks to outline what constitutes a Bill that does not concern county governments as contemplated in Article 103 of the Constitution. Another very important one is that it provides a framework for the conduct of joint processes of the two Houses. We have been sitting here, but there has not been a process. We do not know how to address the issues that arise from disputes. So, we seek to provide a framework within this Bill to resolve those questions so that when the two Houses sit, we know what constitutes a quorum. Assuming that the 290 Members of the National Assembly come here and the Senate has ten Members, will the House quorate? Those are some of the issues that this Bill seeks to resolve. The other very important cornerstone of this Bill is that it deals with the issue of public participation as contained in Articles 10 and 118 of the Constitution. As we know, this is a very important procedure. I reiterate that this matter has been seriously litigated in court. The courts found out that there is a lacuna in the legislation. Let me read what Justice Muriithi clearly stated in the case between the Commission for Implementation of the Constitution and Parliament. The National Assembly has a broad measure of discretion in how it achieves the object of public participation. How this is effected will vary from case to case, but it must be clear that a reasonable level of participation has been afforded to the public. This Bill seeks to ensure that we encapsulate what is contained in Standing Order 127 to provide very clear guidelines on how to conduct public participation. The Constitution in Article 118 provides a general framework, and Standing Order 127 provides the details of the conduct of Business within the House that has nothing to do with the public. We now seek to bring that very elaborate process that is contained in our Standing Orders into a piece of legislation that can be relied on by members of the public and by the courts in arbitrating issues that are of concern to the people when they think that adequate and sufficient public participation has not been conducted. The Bill also seeks to provide a framework for the amicable resolution of disputes between the two Houses. In brief, this Bill is set out in five parts. Part II deals with the publication and the enacting formula. Part III deals with the joint resolution of a question under Article 110 (3) of the Constitution. Part IV deals with the conduct of the joint proceedings and committees. Part V deals with miscellaneous issues, including public participation. Hon. Temporary Speaker, with those many remarks, I beg to move and request Hon. Murugara, the Chairperson of the Justice and Legal Affairs Committee (JLAC), to second. I thank the JLAC for conducting public participation and tabling a good Report with respect to this Bill."
},
{
"id": 1394753,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1394753/?format=api",
"text_counter": 471,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Hon. Peter Kaluma",
"speaker_title": "The Temporary Speaker",
"speaker": {
"id": 1565,
"legal_name": "George Peter Opondo Kaluma",
"slug": "george-peter-opondo-kaluma"
},
"content": " The Chairperson of the JLAC, Hon. Murugara."
},
{
"id": 1394754,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1394754/?format=api",
"text_counter": 472,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Tharaka, UDA",
"speaker_title": "Hon. George Murugara",
"speaker": null,
"content": " Thank you, Hon. Temporary Speaker. I rise to second the Houses of Parliament (Bicameral Relations) Bill (National Assembly Bill No.44 of 2023). We have proposed an amendment to put the brackets after the word \"bicameral\" so The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor"
},
{
"id": 1394755,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1394755/?format=api",
"text_counter": 473,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Tharaka, UDA",
"speaker_title": "Hon. George Murugara",
"speaker": null,
"content": "that it reads as – The Houses of Parliament Bicameral (Relations) Act or The Houses of Parliament (Relations) Act when accented to. It behooves Hon. Members to go through the Report by JLAC on the Bill to acquaint themselves with what the public said about the two Houses. Hon. Chepkonga has moved and stated that the two Houses have been involved in minute and mundane disputes. This should never be the case. We have become a laughing stock of the Executive and the Judiciary because we air our dirty linen in public. We must pass this vital Bill into law so that there are guiding principles when the two Houses are in conflict. It is crucial to acknowledge that there is ongoing litigation in court, and the outcome of the case will confirm whether both Houses of Parliament have passed the Bill into law. Members are advised to read the Report to understand the Bill better. Hon. Chepkonga has elaborately enunciated the difficulties and what the Bill entails, from Part I to V. We have proposed amendments to the Bill that align it with existing legislation to avoid any problems in interpretation. We have also proposed amendments to clauses 1, 3, and 5, which I will not go into detail about. Additionally, we have an amendment to Clause 11, which addresses what happens when the two Speakers cannot jointly resolve a question under Article 110 (3) of the Constitution. We propose to refer the Bill back to the sponsor for further consideration. Alternatively, the Speakers of the two Houses can jointly appoint a person or a body to make recommendations within 14 days to determine the way forward. The rationale is to prevent undue delays when there is a disagreement after a matter has been brought before the House. Hon. Temporary Speaker, we have also proposed Clause 13, and its amendment on what happens when a Bill comes from the Senate or one House to the other. There was a proposal that the Bill should be co-sponsored. We said it could not be co-sponsored because the two Members are from separate Houses and do not sit together. We have now used the terminology \"adoption.\" When a Bill is brought from one House to another, it will be adopted in the second House. There is a whole raft of these proposals in our proposed amendments. I urge Members to look at them. This is a very important Bill that we must pass so that we can start cleaning ourselves. We need to remove this egg on our faces where the other two arms of government laugh at us. They say we cannot solve our problems amicably. We have to go to the third arm of the government to try and have third parties sitting in to listen to our problems. With those remarks, I beg to second the Bill."
},
{
"id": 1394756,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1394756/?format=api",
"text_counter": 474,
"type": "scene",
"speaker_name": "",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": null,
"content": "(Question proposed)"
},
{
"id": 1394757,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1394757/?format=api",
"text_counter": 475,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Hon. Peter Kaluma",
"speaker_title": "The Temporary Speaker",
"speaker": {
"id": 1565,
"legal_name": "George Peter Opondo Kaluma",
"slug": "george-peter-opondo-kaluma"
},
"content": " Hon. Wilberforce Oundo."
},
{
"id": 1394758,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1394758/?format=api",
"text_counter": 476,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Funyula, ODM",
"speaker_title": "Hon. (Dr) Ojiambo Oundo",
"speaker": null,
"content": " I have 10 minutes. Hon. Temporary Speaker, thank you for giving me this opportunity to contribute. I support the Bill. Since I came to Parliament in 2017, I always felt very uncomfortable when any form of dispute between the two Houses escalates beyond Parliament Square and the confines of the offices of the two Speakers. I hope and pray that the spirit and words of this Bill will cure the discomfiting situation that we normally find ourselves in. The Senate was established with a very clear mandate under the law and the Constitution. The National Assembly was likewise established with a very clear mandate under the Constitution. We should not have sibling rivalry. It is an indication that one House has very little to do, so that in the moment of idleness, you pick anything you want to do. It can also be a symptom that the other House charged with doing so much is either too busy or inadequately resourced to the point that it does not have enough time to address all pertinent issues. The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor"
},
{
"id": 1394759,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1394759/?format=api",
"text_counter": 477,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Funyula, ODM",
"speaker_title": "Hon. (Dr) Ojiambo Oundo",
"speaker": null,
"content": "Consequently, the other House takes advantage of the lacuna and generally takes over matters that are not theirs. I attended a mediation committee in an area where I am an expert. I withdrew tactfully because it was becoming difficult to discuss with Members of Parliament who did not understand the subject matter, but they purported to be experts in the matter. I withdrew from the committee. As someone who has gone to school and practised, I did not want to be embarrassed by people who did not understand the area of study we were dealing with. I have gone through the Bill. I hope and pray that the spirit will allow us to cure this matter. It is embarrassing for the two Houses to go to court. Articles 95 and 96 of the Constitution are very clear. At one time, I was sitting with a Senator. He said the Senate represents counties that are populated by people. They have the right to originate and conclude the law-making process in their chamber because they legislate for the people. I reminded him politely, and he was my senior, that the Senate participates in the law-making process, but it does not make law, save for only the County Revenue Allocation Bill. To an extent, they also pass the Division of Revenue Bill by virtue of the Constitution. About the Bill, let me commend the Chairperson. I hardly ever commend my friend, but I am obliged to commend him today because he and the Committee have done a good job. There are some thought processes involved in the development of the Bill. Hon. Temporary Speaker, allow me to comment on the Bill briefly. I will start with Clause 11. It states: \"11(1) Where the Speakers are unable to jointly resolve a question arising under Article 110 of the Constitution, the Speakers may– (b) jointly appoint any person or body of persons to make such recommendations within seven days on the way forward as may be appropriate.\" I admit I have not read the Report. We might have to consider restricting or limiting the types of bodies that can be called upon to resolve such a matter. I would even propose the Kenya Law Reform Commission, if it is a legal entity, or the Office of the Attorney-General because he has to give a legal opinion on the way forward. If we leave it open, the term \"any person or body of persons\" is so ambiguous that the Speakers can choose anybody within their ranks to purportedly review the matter. Secondly, I also do not see the essence of Clause 12(2) because it is already provided for in the Constitution. It is not a good drafting procedure to copy and paste from the Constitution and put it in a Bill. Perhaps those are some of the areas that we need to provide for. Clause 12(3) is a bit draconian. I disagree with the part that states that the relevant Committee of the Assembly may recommend that a Bill or Motion not be proceeded with by the Assembly for want of compliance with the procedure set out in Article 109(5) of the Constitution. I find this too draconian and limiting. We do not fix a working system. Let the Bill go through the normal Second Reading Stage. Let it meet its fate at the end of the Second Reading with recommendations from the Committee. Clause 14 is very critical. We are facing a similar situation. It has been several days since this House selected its Members to the Mediation Committee on the Employment (Amendment) Bill (Senate Bill No.10 of 2022). The Senate has not yet recommended its Members leaving everything in limbo. Clause 14(2) states: \"14(2) The Speakers of both Houses shall appoint a mediation committee consisting of equal numbers of Members of each House, to attempt to develop a version of the Bill that both Houses will pass.\" I want to suggest to Hon. Chepkonga and Hon. Murugara that we put timelines in place, be it a number of sittings – and I propose four sitting days – or, if either House is on recess, probably 14 calendar days. The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor"
},
{
"id": 1394760,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1394760/?format=api",
"text_counter": 478,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Funyula, ODM",
"speaker_title": "Hon. (Dr) Ojiambo Oundo",
"speaker": null,
"content": "Again, the issue of the chairmanship of a meditation committee has been a problem. The Bill states that the Committee shall have equal numbers of Members of each House. An equal number of Members will never elect a chairperson. If each delegation goes in with a fixed mindset, none will ever elect any chairperson. There will always be a stalemate because they have equal numbers and will vote in equal numbers. To resolve the stalemate, I will propose an amendment that the House that rejected the Bill should take up the chairmanship of the Committee, and the House that originated the Bill should take up the vice-chairperson position. How will they resolve disputes? They will do so by consensus, or each House will vote separately. That is another recipe for a stalemate, and we will never move forward. This is a progressive Bill. I request that we get a lot of input on it before it is finalised. Hon. Temporary Speaker, please allow me to finish as I have a several minutes to go. I just wanted to conclude so that I do not encumber the system. I need your guidance."
}
]
}