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=157090",
"previous": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/?format=api&page=157088",
"results": [
{
"id": 1589082,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1589082/?format=api",
"text_counter": 123,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Elisha Ongoya",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": null,
"content": "Sen. Mungatana, the simple and straightforward answer to this question is that not even a notice of appeal, forget about the appeal itself, has been logged in respect of this decision. Not only has the County Assembly not appealed to this decision, but they have not even shown an intention to appeal, which is normally signaled by a notice of appeal. To the question raised by Sen. Cherarkey, my answer is as follows. This was not a conservatory order. This House has historically had issues which conservatory orders granted ex parte . The order we have here was granted after both parties were heard. In fact, the ruling of the court narrates the order of events. The Assembly lawyers were given time to go to their clients, take instructions, then come back and address themselves. So, this order was made after hearing both parties to the dispute. This is what distinguishes this from the other conservatory orders that this House has had occasion to deal with in the past. Sen. Wambua asked us another straightforward question. He asked if the Motion we are dealing with in this House is the same as the Motion that the court dealt with in Meru. Sen. Wambua, the simple and straightforward answer is yes, it is the same Motion that the court declared null and void and of no effect. Sen. Wakili Sigei asked an important question about validity of this Motion and our answer is as follows. The deficiency of this Motion is on multiple grounds. One, there is an order of the court declaring it null and void. When it is declared null and void, it is not a valid Motion. Number two, it is a piece of paper as I told you earlier. I will explain the reason why I say that it is a piece of paper. For a Motion to be said to be a Motion in this House, the distinguished Senate, it must go through the procedures known to the Constitution and the Standing Orders, be voted upon and be a resultant Motion. Even for this House, it cannot be proper for the Speaker and a few Members to sit somewhere, outside this House, and craft material that look like HANSARD and say that this is a Motion. So, it becomes invalid. The video that has just been played and the submission of the counsel prior to playing that video confirms this more than ever before. The counsel said that the HANSARD was completely vandalized. Therefore, they could not produce the HANSARD reports. This begs the question: Where did they get the material they have presented before you purporting to be HANSARD reports? That is not a legitimate origin of a valid Motion of a house. Sen. Kavindu Muthama raised an important question. She asked if it is right for the Senate to go against an order of the court. Generally, court orders involve two disputants. It can be a public interest matter like this, a matrimonial case or whatever case it is. It usually involves two disputants. It is never right for any person to disregard a court order with abandon. We are all consumers of legal judicial services one way or another. When we get a court order in our favor, we desire a country where that order means something. That would, therefore, be my answer to your question."
},
{
"id": 1589083,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1589083/?format=api",
"text_counter": 124,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Elisha Ongoya",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": null,
"content": "Sen. Nyamu asked if all procedural steps were met. My answer is no. Procedural steps were not met. The Motion was not tabled. The Motion was not debated. The question was not put. There was no sitting of an Assembly. Therefore, there could have been no resultant Motion underpinning whatever has been brought before you. The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Director, Hansard and AudioServices, Senate."
},
{
"id": 1589084,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1589084/?format=api",
"text_counter": 125,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Elisha Ongoya",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": null,
"content": "Allow me, in the interest of time, to invite my colleague, Mr. Eric Theuri, to continue with the responses to the various questions. Thank you, for your audience."
},
{
"id": 1589085,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1589085/?format=api",
"text_counter": 126,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Eric Theuri",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": null,
"content": "Hon. Speaker, I will take a minute or two in view of the substantive responses that have come from my colleague, Mr. Ongoya. The only question I have to respond to is one that was posed by Sen. Thang’wa. At the time when the Governor was invited, he was in his office and at 9.00 a.m. or at no time was there a sitting. So, the Governor could not attend any sitting because none was held. A question was posed by Sen. Osotsi with regards to Article 159 of the Constitution. My answer is that the question we are raising is not one of technicalities. It goes to the root of the dispute that is before the Senate. There must be a resolution and in the absence of a resolution, the jurisdiction of the Senate has not been properly invoked. Therefore, it is not a technical procedural issue that can be cured by Article 159(2) of the Constitution, but rather, it goes into the question of the merit and whether the authority of the Senate has been properly invoked. We have submitted that has not happened. I think those were the only questions posed to our side that had not been responded to. Hon. Senators, let me just remind you that the question with regards to the sitting is one that is extremely critical and our position still remains that there was no valid sitting of the 18th or the 26th June. That is abundantly clear when you listen to the responses that are coming from the Assembly. You do not know on which side of the mouth they are speaking from. In one instance, they have said that the HANSARD Office was destroyed and, in another instance, the HANSARD is a true record of the reflection of the proceedings that were held in the House. So, that is the question that we have submitted on and we urge this Hon. Senate to find that there are no proceedings known in law. Therefore, there cannot be a resolution that has been presented to this Hon. Senate to deliberate on. I rest my case."
},
{
"id": 1589086,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1589086/?format=api",
"text_counter": 127,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Boniface Mawira",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": null,
"content": "If I may, Hon. Speaker. With your leave, Hon. Speaker, I request to clarify something that the Mr. Ongoya, Counsel, has misquoted me."
},
{
"id": 1589087,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1589087/?format=api",
"text_counter": 128,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Hon. Kingi",
"speaker_title": "The Speaker",
"speaker": null,
"content": " No. If you go that route, we will never come to the end of this matter."
},
{
"id": 1589088,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1589088/?format=api",
"text_counter": 129,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Boniface Mawira",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": null,
"content": "It is just one clarification."
},
{
"id": 1589089,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1589089/?format=api",
"text_counter": 130,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Hon. Kingi",
"speaker_title": "The Speaker",
"speaker": null,
"content": " You may proceed."
},
{
"id": 1589090,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1589090/?format=api",
"text_counter": 131,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Boniface Mawira",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": null,
"content": "Hon. Speaker, what I said was stolen is the video records of the HANSARD of the 26th. The audio recording of the proceedings of that day is available. That is what we request your leave, Hon. Speaker, to file with the Office of the Clerk. The audio recording of the proceedings of the 26th is available. With respect to the 18th, the audio recording was stolen when the HANSARD room was vandalized on the 26th June. However, it is after that audio had been produced into the HANSARD that is now on the floor in our documents. That is the clarification I wanted to make."
},
{
"id": 1589091,
"url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1589091/?format=api",
"text_counter": 132,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Boniface Mawira",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": null,
"content": "Thank you, Hon. Speaker."
}
]
}