Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 100191,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/100191/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 350,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Dr. Khalwale",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 170,
        "legal_name": "Bonny Khalwale",
        "slug": "bonny-khalwale"
    },
    "content": "Thank you Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir. I rise, partly, as a Member of Parliament and mainly as the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee to thank this Committee for attempting to bring this exercise to a closure because, in our discharge of our duties as Members of the Public Accounts Committee, we know what role the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission plays. That we have been operating without that institution has been a big stumbling block. I rise to support the report by this Committee that Patrick Lumumba, Pravin Bowry and Prof. Onsongo be nominated to that institution. As I do this, I asked myself last night; what really is our role as Parliament in this exercise? I found out that our role is very simple. It is clearly defined that our role is simply that one of vetting. If the role of hon. Members is that one of vetting, what does vetting entail? If we must be honest to our functions which we must discharge without fear or favour, then the process of vetting entails two things. This House must, this afternoon, satisfy itself that the due process of identifying those two men and one woman was above board. Secondly, the House must satisfy itself, this afternoon that the characters of the candidates chosen are up to the task. If we want to question the due process, what are our tools? Our tool is the law which sets out the procedure. Our tools are the organs involved. To me, when I look at the law, I see no point at which due process has been breached. When I look at the organs which have been involved, I have no reason but to support. What do I mean? I looked at the Advisory Board. The Board was chosen very carefully. It brought on board men and women of impeccable character; people who would not be easily influenced to favour any of those three names. We have the Kenya Medical Association in there, engineers, architects, Law Society of Kenya and Federation of Women Lawyers, amongst others. That those people have done this work and we turn up this afternoon and say that they were all wrong, would be a self-defeating exercise. If we want to interrogate the character of those three people, we must go further and ask ourselves: What it is in character that we are looking for? In my mind, we want to question the integrity and competence of those personalities. On the issue of integrity--- I am talking about Dr. Patrick Lumumba. If you go out there in the court of public opinion and you want to score P.L.O. on the issue of integrity, this House would find that in the court of public opinion, Dr. Lumumba would score very highly, indeed. He would not have scored because he has lobbied. Prof. Lumumba has a track record. Many of you know the role that Prof. Lumumba has played in advocacy for the fight against corruption. You know his role in advocacy for the need to have reforms in this country. You would find it very difficult to fault P.L.O. Lumumba on that particular score. On the issue of competence, P.L.O. Lumumba is a lecturer at the University of Nairobi - the best university in the land; the best in East and Central Africa. He is a lecturer, not at some dubious discipline, but at the discipline of law. This is a man whose competence, in my mind, is not in doubt. As I support those three names---"
}