Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1086738,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1086738/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 312,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Homa Bay Town, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Peter Kaluma",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 1565,
        "legal_name": "George Peter Opondo Kaluma",
        "slug": "george-peter-opondo-kaluma"
    },
    "content": " Yes. (i) in the proposed new section 29(1) by — (ii) deleting the proposed new subsection (2) and substituting therefor the following new subsections — (2) A person may apply to the court for declaration as a dependant for purposes of this Act if the person— (b) is reputed by the family of the deceased as having been in such cohabitation; and (c) was being maintained by the deceased prior to his or her death. Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman, this amendment is informed by the contributions made on the Floor. I am abandoning the initial amendments because after consultations they do not change anything much in terms of how the law has been approaching the matter. However, as much as we are defining spouse to have the definitions given to it in the Marriage Act, we also do not want to completely shut out people who may not have formalised marriages and are recognised even by the deceased’s families as people who can by law and under the law benefit from the property of the deceased. Therefore, I am balancing the need to keep the marriage but also allow persons who should be lawful dependants like people who did not just formalise their marriage before death to also benefit from the deceased so long as the party was introduced to the family of the deceased. Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman, I beg to move."
}