Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 111892,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/111892/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 420,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "make changes to the draft outside of the 34 guiding principles. But when they released their draft which went on to the Constitutional Court--- In our case, the Committee of Experts (CoE) is the custodian. In South Africa, the Constitutional Court was the custodian of the guiding principles. It will be recalled that in May, 1996, the South African Constitutional Court disapproved and rejected the Draft Constitution because the Constituent Assembly had stepped out of the 34 guiding principles. They went on to list the four guiding principles that the process had not abided by. So, I want to remind hon. Members that may we make all the effort to live within the spirit of the guiding principles that we have enacted ourselves in this House, for it is only by abiding by those principles that we shall maintain legitimacy for this process. Anything done outside those principles will render any product of this process illegitimate and, inherently, unconstitutional and, therefore, untenable. Mr. Speaker, Sir, as we commence this debate today, we need to be aware that the country is sliding into a state of despair. In January, after 11 days of negotiation, the Parliamentary Select Committee put in place by this House, walked out of Naivasha and announced to the nation that we had a deal. That announcement; that we had build consensus on the four critical areas of contention lifted this country to cloud nine. There was a sense of hope and of renewed anticipation that, finally, the Tenth Parliament had what it takes to crack this 20-year puzzle and deliver a new Constitution to this country. That hope and sense of anticipation, has quickly dissipated and has now been replaced by apprehension and suspicion, especially following the walkout from Kabete without a deal. However, the House has an opportunity to return the country to that pedestal of hope and anticipation. Indeed, as the Chair has said, the Tenth Parliament stands on the threshold of history. Mr. Speaker, Sir, how we handle this opportunity will determine whether we will take a pre-eminent position in the generated pages of the history of this land or whether we will be relegated to a footnote in the pages of the history of this country as yet another House that attempted this task and failed by the wayside. So, it is up to us! Nelson Mandela challenged the people of South Africa when he walked off Robben Island in 1990 that, it falls on a generation only once in a life time or in so many life times, to be great, but it depends on whether that generation chooses to be great or whether that generation chooses to take the opportunity and cement its place in history. It is up to us to decide whether we want to go the way of having failed or whether we want to go the way of history and take our pride of place on the pages of history. Mr. Speaker, Sir, those who have visited the Louvre Museum in Paris may have beheld the eight-metre stelie; a statue or stone standing eight metres. On that stone are inscribed 232 of the earliest laws known to be written history. Those 232 laws are attributed to a man that has come to be known in history as Hamurabi, the law giver. This man lived between the years 1792 BC and 1750 BC. Anybody who enters that museum and stands before that towering statue cannot but be transported back to 1750 BC and marvel at the ingenuity of Hammurabi the law giver and the empire upon which he presided. This is only because of that set of 232 laws that he bequeathed the world as the cornerstone of law making. Mr. Speaker, Sir, 1792 to 1750 BC is mind boggling in terms of the arithmetic of years and time that has passed. We could be remembered several hundred years from"
}