Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1017197,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1017197/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 310,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Kangema, JP",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Clement Kigano",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13358,
        "legal_name": "Clement Muturi Kigano",
        "slug": "clement-muturi-kigano"
    },
    "content": "provisions in the same law, the first one takes precedence over the other. One would say that the advisory note contradicts Article 101 of the Constitution because the import of Maraga’s advisory is to dissolve Parliament. Article 101 provides for dissolution of Parliament and calling for general elections. I stand to be challenged by any lawyer here. Where there are two conflicting provisions in law, the first provision takes precedence. Article 101 comes first in the Constitution. So, if we take it that it takes precedence, Article 261 (7) flops. Fourth, Wanjiku has sovereignty over this country. Wanjiku is the mother and father of the Constitution. The only person who is recognised to be the attorney of Wanjiku in matters of the Constitution is Parliament through Wanjiku’s duly and democratically elected representatives. Would you say that Maraga is a democratically elected attorney? Maraga cannot usurp the powers of Wanjiku as provided under Article 101 and decide to dissolve Parliament. Again, I want to allude to what my colleague, Hon. Aluoch, referred to; Article 259. The word “shall” is employed in Article 259. I want to emphasise that whenever you interpret the Constitution, you must do so in a manner that contributes to good governance. Would you say that the effect of this advisory is going to contribute to good governance? Wanjiku is already overburdened by the effects of the slump in the economy that arose from the COVID-19 pandemic and you are telling her to go for impromptu elections and spend Kshs30 billion and then two years later spend another Kshs10 billion on a general election. That is unwise. I say this emphatically, this action by the Chief Justice demonstrates clearly that he lacks rudimentary tenets of the law. I say this with a lot of respect. I know we should not be discussing the conduct of the Chief Justice but the matters I am alluding to are in the public knowledge. I think he has invited it. Firstly, I want to say this is a Chief Justice who notoriously acquitted the Kiambaa victims when he was a High Court Judge in Nakuru, on very flimsy grounds. Secondly, some other knowledge that you may not know, this Chief Justice was number four in the interview. I do not think it was a question of regional balance, he had a godfather somewhere, and he is still serving and I think there is someone who alluded to bad faith. looking at the way this advisory is crafted, and the story behind it, you cannot slumber for two years and promptly one day wake up and say you are now advising the President. Even the manner in which this advisory was transmitted… it is now public knowledge that is was transmitted through an email to His Excellency . Hiyo ni madharau! It demonstrates he was in a hurry to execute the mandate in the behest of his master. Indeed, the effect of this if it takes effect, and this House is dissolved, just like the Leader of Minority said, it is a mischievous way of killing the BBI. So, in unison, my colleagues, let us support court action, get conservatory orders, and as soon as we can, I would seek and request the Leader of the Majority Party to guide us so that we get a Bill here to amend or repeal Article 261. I am talking about the provision that talks of timelines so that once we remove the timelines, Article 27 will be as is until cows go back home, ng’ombe zirudinyumbani…"
}