Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1062757,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1062757/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 407,
    "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": "I think we should laud the President. The measures that the President has taken in that statement are important. Hon. Speaker, you remember only last week I was the last to suggest during the session here that we should suspend the sittings in the evening and I fully support that. I fully support a situation where we adjust our sittings as appropriate. Article 129 of the Constitution says that one of the functions of the President, both as the Head of Government and the Head of State, is to make sure that whatever actions he takes are for the benefit and for the protection of the people. So, when the President takes such measures for the protection of the people, we cannot fault, but all we can do is to reemphasise that those who write the speeches for the President must always read Article 1 of the Constitution. They must know that executive power is delegated the way legislative power is delegated. They must always read Article 126 of the Constitution that ultimately the President lost the power to control Parliament 11 years ago. They must realise that even the best of measures require persuasion of Parliament rather than dictation to Parliament. That is important. Hon. Speaker, you must note that our Constitution contemplates that even in the most difficult times, if there is one body that should sit, it is Parliament. That is why even the powers of the President to declare an emergency requires parliamentary approval after 14 days. It is not by a small majority. It requires a two-thirds majority to extend it by two months and if you need to extend it again, it requires a three-quarters majority support. It was contemplated that even in difficult times, Parliament would need to sit. That is why even declaration of war under Article 132 of the Constitution requires parliamentary approval. Even if we considered COVID-19 as, indeed, it is a pandemic or even if we considered that it was as bad as war, we must realise and remember that as an august House, it is our role under Article 95 (2) to address concerns of the public even in those times. If we also abdicate that responsibility, then who will address it? I support fully the measures by the President. I support the suggestion to adjust the sittings, but we must bear in mind one thing that disturbs me and that is what we need to address. The projections right now are not very good. Medical doctors here and the statisticians from all literature I have read do not suggest that we can flatten the curve in 30 days. The projection is that the earliest we can flatten the curve is June. So, if we come here after 30 days, what is the assurance that the circumstance will be different? I like it and I think the Leader of the Majority Party is a very wise man. He changed the narrative from suspension of sittings to one of bringing forward the recess, which is very persuasive, but is it really what we are dealing with? If we come here on 30th April 2021 and instead of 27 per cent, we are at 28 or 29 per cent, then what do we do? My point is that we need to consider measures that go beyond questions of recess. My own view is 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."
}