HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 1014466,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1014466/?format=api",
"text_counter": 357,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Funyula, ODM",
"speaker_title": "Hon. (Dr.) Wilberforce Oundo",
"speaker": {
"id": 13331,
"legal_name": "Wilberforce Ojiambo Oundo",
"slug": "wilberforce-ojiambo-oundo-2"
},
"content": " Thank you, Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, for giving me the first chance to contribute to this Bill. For record purposes, you and I sit in a committee called the Committee on Delegated Legislation. One of the toughest challenges we continuously face is to determine the adequacy of public participation. Indeed, the Constitution of Kenya is explicitly clear that any matter, be it policy, legislation or regulations, that affects the people of Kenya in any way or the other, cannot be enacted or implemented without the public having had a say on exactly what they want to be done. However, the toughest challenge and the biggest question is the definition of “public”. In the context of any given piece of legislation, subsidiary legislation or policy matter, the question is the definition of what constitutes the public. Indeed, and it is unfortunate, the Bill that is before us here today does not delve into the specifics of what constitutes the public. For example, is it mandatory that the entire Republic of Kenya is given an opportunity to contribute or have their say on a matter dealing with doctors? Is it necessary for a matter dealing with the code of conduct of the Judiciary, for the judicial officers and the rest, be a matter to be subjected to the so called public participation? I hope, at the appropriate stage during the consideration of this Bill, we will have an opportunity to contextualize and truly define what constitutes public participation. The second point that has always been a big issue to handle is what happens with the views expressed by the public. Is the public authority as indicated in this Act obliged to consider all views provided or offered by members of the public? If, indeed, that is the case, what will be the end product considering that quite a number of views are going to be conflicting? At any given time, typical Kenyans will never agree on any matter. So, it is a matter that we must deliberate and agree. Should we have a threshold that, out of a hundred submissions made, there are those that we will consider and those that we will not? What are the frameworks? What are the issues? I have perused the Bill and one area that is obviously going to remain contentious is Clause 6, so to speak. That Clause 6 requires that any person purporting to present any memorandum or any person wishing to state anything that is adverse about somebody or whichever nature must do so by way of a sworn affidavit before attending, and gives timelines of 30 minutes before then. That provision alone is onerous and difficult to implement. It will, indeed, kill the spirit of public participation. A villager in my constituency of Funyula in the village of Sidonge… For example, we have gone for public participation on the National Government Constituency Development Fund (NG-CDF) projects, and we are asking that villager to prepare a sworn statement if he has a beef to pick with the NG-CDF chair or a PMC committee member! That is, indeed, asking for too much. Yes, it is a good Bill. I support the Bill but we need to make several amendments at the appropriate time. That is to make it reasonable, workable and capable of achieving the intentions of the particular Articles of the Constitution that it seeks to address. Thank you, Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker."
}