Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1057728,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1057728/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 70,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Rarieda, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. (Dr.) Otiende Amollo",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13465,
        "legal_name": "Paul Otiende Amollo",
        "slug": "paul-otiende-amollo"
    },
    "content": "primary purpose of the Senate is to protect the interests of the counties. This includes the interests of the people of the county, governors and the representatives of the people. This Bill seeks to put in a very clear and timely manner how statutory instruments are to be enacted within the county, the limitation of the governor and his or her CECs. It becomes a very good counterpart to an already existing legislation, the Statutory Instruments Act of 2013. On its face, and on a clear reading, it seemed to have concentrated on national legislation and not so much on the county level legislation. That is why, I, think, it is quite important. Clause 5 of this Bill helps us in a very fundamental way, at least, at the county level, in terms of this animal called public participation. To date, that idea of public participation has been a thorn in the flesh even for this House. It has also become the discretion of every judge to decide whether there was sufficient public participation or not. It has become what we call the length of the chancellor’s foot. What this Bill does at the county level, at least, is to prescribe in detail the manner and mode of public participation in a way that lends itself not to defeat an instrument after it has been enacted. In ours, we are still at the mercy of interpretation. The proposed Clause 6 then does something that is very innovative, the regulatory impact assessment along the lines of the environmental impact assessment. This is quite important because it gives both the county and the people of that county an opportunity to re-examine the cost of that instrument whether there is an alternative and its effects, which I think, is very important. It is something that we have not always done sufficiently even at the national level. Lastly, and in support of this Bill, it also empowers the county assembly. It does so because it removes the whims of the governor in terms of making decrees, but then have the force of law at the county level. Every instrument then must be brought to the county assembly within seven days and must be passed. If it is not brought within the prescribed time or passed, it cannot have the force of law. It binds the governor and his or her government to ensure accountability by presenting all those things that they want to have the force of law before the county government. That is very important. I only have one problem with the proposed Clause 18. Clause 18 does something that I have never seen in any legislation. It stipulates that whatever instrument is passed will cease to have effect exactly 10 years from the date it was passed. I have never seen any legislation that contemplates its own death without any invitation. It is very curious because legislation and statutory instruments are supposed to exist in perpetuity until and unless, the body that enacted them, choses to repeal or amend them. A proposal that you can make a statutory instrument after all these proposals, then it automatically lapses, for me, it flies in the face of all constitutional propositions that I know, and it also flies in the case of logic. What is more curious is that it proposes that the only thing that can save that automatic death, if the regulations say that it does not have to die, is trite law. Regulations cannot be enacted to contradict a substantive provision in the Act. That means there is no way any regulation can save any instrument if this particular part passes. That is my own issue with it which I believe our Committee and this august House will give due consideration during the Committee of the whole House. With that, I support."
}