Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1038949,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1038949/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 13,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Lusaka",
    "speaker_title": "The Speaker",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Hon. Senators, in regard to the issue raised by the county assembly, I wish to confirm that their application is on record and already served on the governor. Rule 19 of Part I of the Fifth Schedule to the Senate Standing Orders on the Rules of Procedure when considering the proposed removal in plenary provides that- “In presenting its evidence, the Assembly shall not introduce any new evidence that was not a part of the allegations against the Governor by the County Assembly as forwarded by the Speaker of the County Assembly to the Speaker of the Senate.” Hon. Senators, having perused the request which is on record, I will allow the county assembly to summon not more than three other witnesses excluding the Governor and the Commissioner-General, Kenya Prisons Service (KPS). I also wish to inform the county assembly that they must canvass their case, including the additional three witnesses, within the allocated time of four hours today and further that they shall not introduce any new evidence. Accordingly, I direct the counsel for the county assembly to liaise with the Office of the Clerk of the Senate for summons to issue to the three additional witnesses. While the practicability of this may pose challenges, it should be noted that the hearing is for two days and this request must be made at the hearing. Hon. Senators, in respect of the governor, the issues that were alluded to by way of the preliminary objection are also on record and they speak to alleged procedural impropriety/non-compliance of laws at the county assembly and live court proceedings in relation to matters before the Senate. On the procedural and substantive questions raised, it is clear to me that these are matters requiring evidence in order to prove and for which the other side has an opportunity of rebuttal with evidence. The Senate can only make a fair determination having heard the evidence on both sides. This is the essence of this investigation. The investigation before the Senate is both in respect of procedural, as well as substantive matters. To that extent and following precedence, it is clear to me, and I so rule, that pursuant to Rule 29 of the Fifth Schedule of the Senate Standing Orders, any preliminary objection, both procedural and substantive should be properly subsumed in the evidence of either party and presented at the time allocated to that party. On the objection based on subjudice, it is important to note the following three things – (1) Subjudice is a rule of the Senate itself, for its own convenience; (2)It is also a rule requiring evidence for it to be invoked; and, (3)It is not an absolute rule as Standing Order No. 98(5) of the Senate Standing Orders provides that notwithstanding that Standing Order, the Speaker may allow reference to any matter before the Senate or a Committee, and following the precedents. It is quite clear that the competence and jurisdiction of the Senate to hear a proposed removal from office is a constitutional mandate of the Senate independent of the mandate of the Judiciary or any other organ. From all the foregoing, I rule as follows-"
}