Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1049338,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1049338/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 47,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Tongaren, FORD-K",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. (Dr.) Eseli Simiyu",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 141,
        "legal_name": "David Eseli Simiyu",
        "slug": "david-eseli"
    },
    "content": "Constitutional Implementation Oversight Committee and the Departmental Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs had gone through. He expressed his reservations on certain matters. I was heartened when I remembered that Hon. Jeremiah Kioni was part of the 10th Parliament, which, in essence, was a post-conflict Parliament. We had to make very many bi-partisan compromises so that we could move the country forward. I believe the two committees; namely, the Departmental Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs and the Constitutional Implementation Oversight Committee are up to the task. I have also seen the Report of their joint meeting to try and harmonize the two Bills. If they have gone to that extent, I am confident that, by the time we get to the Committee of the Whole House, they will bring those amendments that they feel are fit to be included in this Bill that might have been initially left out. I have full confidence that given the circumstances, we will be able to reach proper compromises that will not completely water down the intent of the Bill when it becomes law. The country badly needs this law. The cost of the referendum, as has been bandied by the commissioners at the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC), was rather worrying. It appeared like the IEBC is not living in the present-day Kenya where there are a lot of financial constraints and everybody needs to cut back on unnecessary expenditures. The IEBC needs to be more realistic in their estimates of the cost of a referendum. Those costs should be much lower than what they are implying they should be. The other matter I would like to point out is the issue of public participation. It is the constitutional right for the public to participate but, in the case of a popular initiative, going out there to get the one million signatures is no mean feat. Is that not public participation? If you are able to collect over one million signatures, perhaps, the public has participated in this matter. Perhaps, when we are looking at a popular initiative, we need to relook at these things. It is all very well to have a blanket law that says that there should be public participation in everything. However, find out how this started. If it started by public participation already, are you still justified by insisting that there should be public participation? When you are collecting those signatures, there is quite a bit of public participation. I have looked at the Bill generally. Clause 7(2) states that county governments may conduct local referendum on, among other local issues… We live in this country and have seen what happens in the counties. The Departmental Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs can rise to the occasion and tighten this up a bit so that we can specify exactly what county governments can go to referenda on in their counties. Remember, this is also a cost. We cannot just leave it open. We might end up having referenda on almost everything in the counties. We need to tidy this up a bit so that we are very clear on what we mean when we say that the county governments can have referenda. Which referenda are those that the county governments can have? Even if we say they will use the Election Laws, what can they go to or not go to a referendum on? Otherwise, you will have 47 referenda every year from all the 47 counties. We need to tighten that up a bit. There is also the issue of timelines. We need proper timelines in this matter because if you leave it too open, you can have some people who are mischievous and delay everything. I noticed that with the Departmental Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs and the Constitutional Implementation Oversight Committee Meeting Compromise Report. They seem to have tightened up the issues at the court. This Bill allows the Court of Appeal to take six months to give their verdict. You might end up with - for lack of a better word “judicial filibustering”, which is very common in this country. You get tied up in the courts for good and you will never move. I agree with the compromise that they will put it for 30 or so days. It is not just for the Building Bridges The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor."
}