Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1111666,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1111666/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 383,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Farhiya",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13179,
        "legal_name": "Farhiya Ali Haji",
        "slug": "farhiya-ali-haji"
    },
    "content": "The Bill also stipulates that in carrying out the audit the commission that is tasked to carry out the lifestyle audit is the EACC. They are required to inform the officers of the requirement to carry out the audit, submit to the officer information regarding the intended audit, reasons for the audit, accord the officer the right to be heard on the audit. Where there is reasonable ground to suspect that the public officer has unlawfully obtained income would be insufficient to allow for the officers to obtain property held by such officer, the Bill empowers the EACC to apply to the High Court for such warrants to be issued against the officer to explain the nature and the interest of a particular property and the manner in which the property was acquired. Madam Temporary Speaker, the Bill allows the commission to carry a search warrant in exceptional cases where it is believed that if we wait for a court ruling, the evidence is likely to disappear. In that case, the Bill allows the commission to carry out the search without a warrant. The Bill also makes it an offence for a person during the conduct of a lifestyle audit to knowingly--- People say that probably this is inhibitive sometimes. A couple of people have talked to me and said that that section is counterproductive in terms of reporting such criminals. The other thing is that it says “knowingly”. So, somebody has to prove that you knew this did not exist, but you went ahead and reported. It is the onus of the person who is accusing you to prove that. The onus is also on you to prove the reason why you felt this was beyond their means. The Bill also empowers the High Court to vary or discharge interim freezing orders. The Bill also allows once the EACC applies to the High Court for the High Court to issue interim freezing orders. It will require to specify the period for which the freezing order will be valid and it should not be more than three months. This is just to ensure that when people’s property are frozen and they cannot have economic gains, it fast-tracks that process so that if you are not culpable of the crime you are being accused of, you can still continue having gainful economic activities using either the money in your account, or the property that is being frozen. The Bill also empowers the High Court to vary or discharge freezing orders on the application by the commission or by the person affected by the order. After such discharge, the Bill allows the owner of the property subject to the order to apply to the High Court the compensation within three months from the date of discharge. The High Court may make an order for the compensation only if it is satisfied that the applicant has suffered a loss as a result of making the interim freezing orders. There has been a serious default on the part of the commission and that the loss would not have been made had the default not occurred. The Bill further provides that where an officer of the commissioner without reasonable cause applies or knowingly relies on false information to obtain an interim freezing orders, the order is subsequently discharged and compensation awarded. The officer shall be personally liable to pay the compensation and disciplinary action will be taken against him. Madam Temporary Speaker, the Bill also allows the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) to apply to the High Court for freezing of an account order with respect to account that is subject to lifestyle audit. The Bill allows that such an"
}