Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1072569,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1072569/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 52,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Omogeni",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13219,
        "legal_name": "Erick Okong'o Mogeni",
        "slug": "erick-okongo-mogeni"
    },
    "content": "The Committee was not persuaded that other plans that do not specifically respond to this obligation can be a substitute for this very clear statutory requirement. However, the Committee observed that not each violation or failure to observe a particular section of a statute should lead to impeachment. The Committee looked at the precedent that has been set by past impeachments and arrived at a decision that what should lead to an impeachment of a governor should be gross violation of the Constitution. The Committee was, therefore, of the view that though clearly the Governor had not complied with the provisions of Section 30(2)(j) of the County Government Act, 2012, this violation per se, does not meet the threshold for the impeachment of the Governor. Therefore, though the allegation was proved before the Committee, we found that it does not meet the threshold for impeaching a Governor. Therefore, the Committee was of the view that this particular allegation should not return a verdict of removal. Mr. Speaker, Sir, several governors have appeared before the Senate in past impeachments. We cited the case of the impeachment of the Governor for Taita Taveta and the Governor for Kirinyaga counties. We found that in both impeachments, there were statutes that were violated by these governors but the Senate returned a verdict that that failure to observe the provisions of those statutes were not gross enough to warrant the impeachment of a governor. On Allegation No.8, failure to establish an audit Committee, the Committee went through this allegation. It arrived at the decision that the allegation was not proved as against the Governor. Therefore, the same was dismissed as having not been substantiated."
}