Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1022642,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1022642/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 267,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Kipipiri, JP",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Amos Kimunya",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 174,
        "legal_name": "Amos Muhinga Kimunya",
        "slug": "amos-kimunya"
    },
    "content": " Thank you, Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker. I want to start by thanking the Committee for the patience they had based on the Report, as they were taken through this run around by the petitioners and others. Everyone using information they have to their advantage, is obviously purporting to mislead Parliament to sanitise some irregular allocations on the subject land. I want to ask Members to avoid emotions on this matter and base it on facts. Fortunately, I know this land because I was the Minister for Lands between 2003 and 2006. This same matter came to my attention. So, beyond the Committee, I also know a little more about this matter. I have also received an advisory sent to the Speaker and copied to me from the Attorney-General of the Republic of Kenya as a response to the Committee’s Report. As Members debate this matter, emotional as we might get, let us remember that any transaction on this land will have to be based on the law. If it is illegal, it will go nowhere. It matters not what we say, but the transactions will have to be based on the law. The thrust of the Attorney-General’s advisory is based on the fact that in the 80s, and the dates are in the Report, the Government of Kenya compulsorily acquired this land for purposes of the Department of Defence, from the last registered owner Mr. Samuels using Cap 295, which is now being repealed. That acquisition process was notified, meetings took place to discuss the compensation, valuation was done and a cheque deposited because the seller of the land challenged the value of Kshs3 million. For purposes of Members to understand land acquisition as it was then, the Government would identify land and issue a notice of acquisition for a certain purpose. They would call people to be told about the compensation. If there was disagreement, the Government would first pay what they had valued. Then, later, through tribunals or appeals, one would process any enhancements they wanted. In the meantime, once the Government had deposited the payments on what they thought the land was worth, a notice to take possession was issued. That was the finality of the acquisition. In terms of whether you were paid more or less, was a cash flow issue."
}