Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 103964,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/103964/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 295,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "resources. Whenever there is an incident that arouses public displeasure and generates pressure on the state, the method used to hoodwink the public has been to create commissions and create the impression that the state is serious and is determined to go to the root of the problem. That always happens when there is public pressure. However, as soon as the public pressure has precipitated by the time the reports are available, they are shelved to ensure that the public never gets to know the truth. So, this amendment will, therefore, serve a great public purpose of removing that tool in the hands of the State. It will not appoint a commission if it knows that at the end of the day it does not want to share the information to be generated with the public. During Commissions of Inquiry, at times there is a lot public pressure and public resources are used and victims subjected to interviews. They give their input and views in the belief that justice would ultimately be done but when those reports are made public, they are shelved and no action is taken. One example relates to the famous Ouko Commission where the public at the time of the protracted demonstrations after the discovery of the murder of the former Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Government went on record and promised Kenyans that no stone would be left unturned in unearthing the culprits who were responsible for the murder. But in the process of conducting this Commission, when indeed some stones started turning, we discovered the real intention of the Government. The Government moved in to abruptly terminate the proceedings of the Commission arguing that the Commission was receiving hearsay evidence. It is to be noted that the Kenyan people who were in charge of that Commission were experienced judges of the High Court and Court of Appeal. So the claim that they were handling hearsay evidence was a non-starter. So the real intention of the State in appointing that Commission was to cover up the murder. As soon as evidence started coming to the open as to whom the actual culprits were, we saw the state exposing its real face. This amendment, therefore, to the extent that it seeks to demystify the power of the commission appointed by the President by ensuring that ultimately the outcome of the investigations are brought to the public limelight, is going to remove that abuse and ensure that the powers of the commissions will only be exercised for the just interest of public good in this country. For those reasons, I also support the amendment."
}