HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 1083735,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1083735/?format=api",
"text_counter": 92,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Suba North, ODM",
"speaker_title": "Hon. (Ms.) Odhiambo-Mabona",
"speaker": {
"id": 376,
"legal_name": "Millie Grace Akoth Odhiambo Mabona",
"slug": "millie-odhiambo-mabona"
},
"content": "misconduct in her constituency is not necessarily gross in my constituency. Therefore, if we leave it blank by not defining what it is, then it may be subject to abuse. The other concern that I have is if you look at Clause 4(4), it states that the Clerk of the National Assembly shall submit the proposed Motion to the Speaker. After how long? When people want to play politics, they can decide to submit it to the Speaker after six months and will still be within the law. So, we need to tighten such issues, so that the people meant to be impeached are impeached. Another issue of concern to me, which I wanted to countercheck with the Constitution, but I did not have time, is the select committee that makes a decision which is final and does not go before the House. I hope to have time before it comes to the Committee of the whole House. It is easy to compromise few people than the entire House, even though I know sometimes when the stakes are high, this may also happen. So, these are some of the areas I am concerned about. Another issue I have is on Clause 9(4) and (5), which do not give days within which the impeachment procedures should be brought. I know there are other issues which, if I have time, I will bring out, but if I do not, I will bring to the attention of the Committee so they can look at them. In Clause 16, we are talking about the select committee and how to appoint it. Sometimes in politics, what looks like common sense is never common. You can find in a House, if the Speaker is favourable to them, the ruling Government deciding to appoint Members from the entire Government side and ignoring the opposition. We have seen it happen in the past and can happen again. So, let us not presume common sense in law. You must write what you intend. So, if you are talking about the membership, what is the ratio of Government to opposition in that committee? Again, looking at the introduction of the Motion under Clause 21, I would like to encourage that when introducing a Motion, it should not be in technicalities, but on substantive issues, so that we do not have a situation where instead of a governor or President working, they are worried about impeachment Motions coming their way. Once the substantive issues have been dealt with, it should be a done deal. Again, I can see Clause 25, which provides that: “(25) Article 182(4) to (6) of the Constitution shall apply where a vacancy occurs in the office of a governor and that of a deputy governor under this Act”. I know, even if it is tedious sometimes, it is good to replicate. I have noticed many ministries do not refer back to the Constitution, but when it is provided clearly in an Act of Parliament, they follow it. Finally, on the provisions which are of concern to me, is Clause 32(2) which states: “(2) All proceedings under this Act shall be open to the public unless in exceptional circumstances where the person presiding over the proceedings has determined that there are justifiable reasons for the exclusion of the public”. What are these justifiable reasons? I know a lot of time when we leave things loosely like this, it becomes very easy to exclude the public. It should be an issue that has to do with security or other serious issues that can lead to exclusion of the public. Otherwise, I support and I hope the Committee has taken note and can bring amendments to the areas that I have raised. Thank you."
}