Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1017032,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1017032/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 145,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Rarieda, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. (Dr.) Otiende Amollo",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13465,
        "legal_name": "Paul Otiende Amollo",
        "slug": "paul-otiende-amollo"
    },
    "content": "interpretation that would precipitate a bigger constitutional crisis while trying to solve a small constitutional crisis. It is on that reason that I believe that although the CJ has advised the President to dissolve Parliament, that particular advice should not be adopted. It should not be adopted for a number of reasons. First of all, there is no timeline and, therefore, we can use that time to prudently examine what is to happen. The reason it should not be adopted is this. If you look carefully at our Constitution, all the elections are lumped together on the same day. The President is to be elected the same day when the governors, Members of Parliament and MCAs are being elected. All of them are elected on the same day of the general elections. And that date is given. Any consequence in my view, of dissolving Parliament, must of necessity dissolve all those other bodies including the presidency as elected. That would then mean that we would not just be talking of a crisis of Parliament, but a crisis of all other institutions. Then we come to the second and a bigger difficulty. If that is to be solved, for the President who is serving his second term and the governors who are serving their second terms and who by the Constitution would be barred for further running, for this particular one, will they be eligible or not? That is a constitutional question that must be determined beyond just advising the President to dissolve Parliament. We are in even other problems as we speak today, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) is not properly constituted. The Justice and Legal Affairs Committee (JLAC) only considered the draft Bill which is yet to be presented on how to appoint other commissioners of the IEBC. Which IEBC will be able to conduct those elections in their immenseness to the satisfaction of the Constitution? Therefore, I find that we are in a situation where what was intended to be solved, ends up being a smaller constitutional issue than what will be created because we would have to determine whether they are eligible. That is why I support the Parliamentary Service Commission (PSC), I support the move to go to court for further interpretation. We must have that further interpretation clearly before we rush to the issue of dissolution. Three weeks ago, I urged the leadership of this House that there is something else we can do in the meantime. The problem with Article 262 is the timeline. That we were unable to pass the legislation within six years. I suggested and I still want to suggest to the leadership that we can consider amending Article 262 and simply move from the six years to 10 or 15 years or whatever the case. The whole issue would have gone away. We do not even need a referendum for that. As I close, I want to suggest that these are the kind of issues that are ideal to be considered in a referendum when you are amending the Constitution and especially when we understand from the perspective of His Excellency the President and the former Prime Minister that the Building Bridges Initiative (BBI) Report is about to be released. That would be a good occasion to consider the death of this matter. If you are to take that advice now, we will plunge into a deeper constitutional crisis. Therefore, my view is, that advice, well-meaning as it might be, is advice that should not be taken because we will be in a crisis. Thank you, Hon. Speaker."
}