Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1123435,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1123435/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 479,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Suba North, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. (Ms.) Odhiambo-Mabona",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 376,
        "legal_name": "Millie Grace Akoth Odhiambo Mabona",
        "slug": "millie-odhiambo-mabona"
    },
    "content": "of her unpaid dower. (4) Except for a testamentary waqf, a person may dedicate his or her entire property as a waqf . (5) A person shall not dedicate more than one third of his or her property to a waqf in case of a testamentary waqf . (6) A waqf shall not be used for purposes prohibited by Islamic law, repairs or maintenance of the waaqif’s secular property, providing for the rich or for objects which are uncertain. I am moving that Clause 4 be amended as per the Order Paper, but with further amendments. I am moving further amendments to my amendments in the Order Paper. In other words, I am going to drop, in my proposed amendments. I had indicated in my amendment that we delete the entire Clause 4 and then replace it with what is here. But, now, what I am proposing is that we delete Clause 4(1) and replace it with my Clause 4(1)(a)(b)(c). That (c) becomes (a). That we reorder so that the (c) becomes (a) and we merge (d) and (e) so that it provides that it is made for religious purposes and for the poor and vulnerable within the Muslim community. Then we delete the rest and retain (2), that person shall only make a waqf in relation to property that the person owns. The rest provided remains in the Bill and (2) in the Bill. I hope I am not very confusing. That is the effect of our harmonisation. I can actually read what I am doing in effect. Can I read it so that it is clearer?"
}