Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1092538,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1092538/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 295,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Ruaraka, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. T.J. Kajwang’",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 2712,
        "legal_name": "Tom Joseph Kajwang'",
        "slug": "kajwang-tom-joseph-francis"
    },
    "content": "just be applicable to a certain group of people and not applicable to others? She says, if a Waqf is set, then the benefits of that Waqf should be applicable to everybody, regardless of religious persuasion or doctrinal issues. That is why it is personal law. People choose the regime under which they want. There are people who have professed Christianity, there are people who have professed African customary law to guide their personal law. So, if persons have professed Islamic law, just the fact that this law, therefore, benefits such group of people, it does not make it unconstitutional. It would not be argued that people from other persuasions would want to benefit from a law for which it is not a personal law. So, I think sometimes we have extended passion to judge our constitutionality when we decide these things. I mean, if you are not a member of the Islamic faith, so why do you want to benefit from it? Is it because the sadaka or the Waqf comes from the Muslim people or because it is decided by the Islamic law? So, you want them to donate, you want them to give, and then you want to take a benefit from it. When you cannot donate to the same kitty, it does not make sense. I think yesterday there was a suggestion that it was a discriminative law which tries to alienate society. Therefore, I have shown and we will clearly show how it alienates society. We will clearly show in the Report that it is not unconstitutional. The question would be, if the trustees of the Waqf decide to benefit a community that is not generally Islamic, that is what has not come out here, which should come out well. This is because that, again, can happen here and it is unconstitutional. For example, the commissioners can decide to build a school in an area which is predominantly Christian. Should that happen, it is not unconstitutional. That is perceived especially, if they are poor people and if they relate to the basic principles which are here."
}