Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1072603,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1072603/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 86,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. (Eng.) Hargura",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 827,
        "legal_name": "Godana Hargura",
        "slug": "godana-hargura"
    },
    "content": "‘Public officers involved in transactions in which standard goods, services and works are procured at unreasonably inflated prices shall, in addition to any other sanctions prescribed in this Act or the Regulations made thereunder, be required to pay the procuring entity for the loss resulting from their actions.’ The law is very clear in cases where a breach has occurred. The public officer involved in that procurement should be held liable. I urge the Wajir County Assembly to take action upon the officers implicated because the officers in question are under their purview of oversight. Transferring blame to the Governor for breaking the procurement laws in such an instance will not suffice. I urge all the county assemblies to consider the reports of the Auditor-General concerning the expenditure of funds in their counties, digest and summon the relevant officers to account. In cases where the county assemblies have taken action against the relevant officer and the Governor fails to implement, then the governor can be held accountable for not taking action against his officer. The Committee advised that the County Assembly takes action against public officers who break procurement laws. By doing that, they can remedy the breaking of procurement laws at the county level, instead of escalating it to the Senate. Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would like to reiterate the observations of the Mover of the Motion. The timeframe of carrying out the impeachment process is not enough. We need to amend our Standing Orders, so that we have enough time to consider matters of impeachment whenever they are brought before the House. Standing Order 75 (4) (a) states that: - ‘If the special committee reports that the particulars of any allegation against the governor— (a) have not been substantiated, no further action shall be taken under this section in respect of that allegation;’ My understanding is that the Special Committee, just like any other Committee of the House, is working for the House. Whatever the Special Committee establishes should be brought to the House, which will have the final say. In this instance, if the Committee did not substantiate any allegation, the report should be submitted to the House for debate. We could decide that if two-thirds majority of the House votes to overturn the findings of the Committee, the same should be implemented. If that is implemented, more Members would prefer impeachment hearings to be conducted through committees, since the proceedings will not be terminated using the provisions of Standing Order 75(4) (a). In the charge against abuse of office, very emotive issues were raised. The Senate will in future have to ask for facts before making any conclusion. It is for that reason that we insisted that any information provided should be admissible to us. For instance, in the case of bank statements that were presented by the Wajir County Assembly, we inquired how the documents were acquired, but the witness was unwilling to share the source and"
}