Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1085261,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1085261/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 260,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Mwangi",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 75,
        "legal_name": "Ephraim Mwangi Maina",
        "slug": "ephraim-maina"
    },
    "content": "I rise, pursuant to Standing order 48 (1) to seek a Statement from the Standing Committee on Roads and Transportation regarding the demolition by the Kenya Railways Corporation (KRC) of properties in Ol-Kalou, Nyandarua County. In the Statement, the Committee should- (1) Explain the reasons for the demolition by KRC of properties built on the corporation’s land without issuing notices to the affected parties and yet the properties have valid leases from the corporation (2) Outline the measures, if any, that the corporation has put in place to ensure that lease holders with valid leases which have not expired are fully compensated for the losses incurred following the demolition (3) State the measures the Ministry will put in place to ensure that the rights of valid lease holders along the railway corridors are protected As we are all aware, the KRC had adopted a regeneration strategy of its old and delinked railway lines. We can all agree that this is highly commendable and should be encouraged. However, Kenyans who have leased KRC land and put up investments on the same should be compensated. On 16th February 2021, the residents of Ol-Kalou woke up to the sound of bulldozers and excavators as they tore down their properties in the guise that they were built illegally on KRC land. These demolitions were carried out despite the fact that the affected parties have genuine and valid leases from the KRC, and that no notice had been issued to them prior to the demolitions. Madam Temporary Speaker, one is left to wonder, did KRC forget that it had leased this land to the aggrieved parties? What warranted the corporations action? The actions of the corporation were in total disregard and in contravention of the provisions of Article 40 of the Constitution on protection of---"
}