Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1091495,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1091495/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 196,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Suba North, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. (Ms.) Millie-Odhiambo",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 376,
        "legal_name": "Millie Grace Akoth Odhiambo Mabona",
        "slug": "millie-odhiambo-mabona"
    },
    "content": "In Clause 4, is there a specific Islamic law relating to waqf that can be re-stated here in law so that lawyers do not go digging in case of disputes? Those are issues we need to sort out here. Otherwise we will have a problem when these matters go to court. I also want to indicate that I used to practise in the Kadhi’s Court representing women. So, I know what I am talking about. The proviso in Clause 4 makes any property subject to a waqf and only property intended and declared as such should be included but the provision makes almost every property subject. Again, looking at Clause 4 (2), it seems to create trust in perpetuity for unknown causes. That is very dangerous. It might go back to the property of… My greatest grandfather is called Magazime. I will look for the property of Magazime and make it a property of waqf if we can declare that he was a Muslim. We cannot create succession in perpetuity. Clause 6 and other clauses refer to trustees and even mete out punishment to them. I think that is one of the things that even my friend, Hon. Jaldesa, is saying as a positive, which indeed it is, but how are they established or appointed? This Bill does not tell us how the trustees are established or appointed. They are not legal entities by this law hence they cannot be held to account. We cannot subject a lot of property to this Act when we are not able to establish trustees by law and hold them accountable by law. So, if we say we are punishing the trustees and we are taking them for life or how many years, who are they? The law does not establish who they are. In Clause 7, the word “or” between (d) and (e) in the last sentence creates a different meaning. It implies those under (e) may not be subject to the panel. It is actually an error which I hope the Departmental Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs is looking into and it will sort it out. In Clause 7 (2), it is said that the selection panel shall comprise five eminent Muslims of either gender. What that means is that you can actually select only men or you can select only women. That is also unconstitutional. I think the person who was crafting this did that in error because it should be two-thirds. The selection in representation is not excluded. Governance issues are not excluded even when we are dealing with Muslim issues that come to the Floor of this House. Clause 7 (4) states that the selection panel shall invite views from Muslims in respect of the shortlisted candidates. My immediate neighbour is a Muslim and a very nice guy but suppose he was a terrible person who is a night runner who gives us stress in our neighbourhood and I see his name listed, my view shall not be taken because I am a non-Muslim. Hell, no! I will give my views by law. So, we cannot exclude and say that we will not give views because we are not Muslims. Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, I can see my time is almost up but I have several governance and constitutional issues that we must bring to make sure that we tighten this law so that it meets constitutional standards. I want to encourage my Muslim sisters and brothers. I have a very big population of Muslims in the constituency that I represent here. Once this law is here, it is a law for Kenyans. This is the National Assembly. We will strengthen it the way we strengthened other pieces of legislation. It does not mean we oppose you. With those remarks, I support the Bill with amendments."
}