Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1001534,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1001534/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 108,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "In view of the foregoing, Article 251 of the Constitution does not apply in the removal of a member of the PSC. It is, therefore, my view that the right procedure is one that contemplates revocation of appointment by Parliament, but at the same time, taking into account the need for clearly defined grounds for removal from office and the requirements of fair administrative action. This is the essence behind Section 10 of the PSC Act 2019. Looking at the Report of the Departmental Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs on the Parliamentary Service Bill, 2018, now an Act of Parliament, the Committee observed as follows on the procedure of removal from office of a member of the PSC on pages 35 to 39: “It is notable that the Commission is one of the constitutional commissions listed in Article 248 of the Constitution and it would appear from the face of it as if the provisions of Article 251 of the Constitution on the procedure of removal of a member of a constitutional commission would apply. However, it is notable that Article 248 (1) of the Constitution provides that the provisions of Chapter 15, including Article 251 of the Constitution, apply except to the extent the Constitution provides otherwise. Article 127 of the Constitution is one exception of the application of the provisions of Chapter 15 and, in particular, on the composition, mode of appointment and the removal process of the commissioners of the PSC, among others. In this regard, the procedure for removal of a commissioner as espoused in Article 251 of the Constitution does not apply to commissioners of the PSC. A close reading of Article 127 of the Constitution reveals that Article 127 does not provide for the procedure of the removal of a commissioner from the PSC, save for it providence for the manner in which an office of a member of the Commission might become vacant. Therefore, there is need to anchor in law a procedure for the removal of commissioners. As drafted, the Clause suggests that the procedure under Article 251 should apply to the commissioners of the PSC contrary to the aforementioned advice by the Speaker and the provisions of Article 248 (1) of the Constitution.” Based on the observations, the Committee proceeded to propose an amendment which is currently Section 10 of the PSC Act, 2019. Section 10 of the Act provides as follows with regard to the procedure for removal of a member of the PSC. 10 (1) A Member of Parliament supported by, at least, one quarter of the Members of the respective House may propose a Motion for the removal of a member of the Commission only for: (a) Serious violation of the Constitution or any other law, including a contravention of Chapter 6; (b) Gross misconduct whether in the performance of the member’s functions or otherwise; (c) Physical or mental incapacity to perform the functions of the office; (d) Incompetence; and, (e) Bankruptcy. (2) If a Motion presented under (1) is supported by, at least, one-third of the Members of the respective House: (a) The respective House shall appoint a Select Committee comprising of 11 of its Members to investigate the matter. (b) The Select Committee shall within 10 days, report to the respective House whether it finds the allegations against the Member of the Commission to be substantiated. (3) Where the Select Committee finds that: 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."
}