HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 1133676,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1133676/?format=api",
"text_counter": 788,
"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": " Thank you, Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, for giving me this opportunity. I want to say, as a lawyer, and especially a human rights lawyer, that these are not very easy issues because it is a question that pit rights against rights. It pits the right against discrimination, the right to privacy and the right to self-incrimination against the social and economic rights, as well as the right to good governance. Whichever way we look at it, one may have to give way, and the Constitution has a solution on who that must give way. I am actually happy that Hon. Kaluma referred to good governance under Article 10 of the Constitution on accountability, but beyond that, if you are dealing with issues of money laundering, it actually negates my own right to fair trade practices. I may not be able to access services and contracts or have a good life. So, it affects a whole spectrum of my rights because of a bad practice. However, nonetheless, we still have other rights which constitutionally must be protected. That is why I am saying that it is not an easy issue, but we must deal with it. We must, in the process, also distinguish between what is constitutional and what is undesirable. There may be things which are undesirable, but are not necessarily unconstitutional and vice versa . Since Members have spoken a lot to some of these issues, I will just pick one by one. The first one is the issue of discrimination against lawyers or advocates and accountants under Article 27(4) of the Constitution. I would actually call on your Office to declare that unconstitutional if it is not amended to include other professions. If it is amended to include other professions, then there is nothing unconstitutional. But if you pinpoint on lawyers or advocates and accountants, then it is unconstitutional. So, the way to cure that is to give a ruling stating that amendments should include morticians, therapists, bankers, beauticians and all those other professions so that it is not unconstitutional. We must safeguard this country. Again, I want to talk to the other issue that has been spoken to, and which is the issue of privacy. Hon. Kaluma has spoken to it. Maybe, because I do not have time, I cannot look at it. But the Constitution, under Article 24 gives the threshold for limitation of privacy. What it provides is very clear that we shall look at the nature of the right or fundamental freedom, the importance and the purpose of limitation, which is protecting lives as well as the nature and extent of the limitation. So, if you are protecting lives, then there is even no issue that is up for discussion. They need to ensure that the enjoyment of the rights and fundamental freedoms by any individual does not prejudice the rights of others. So, where my rights begin, I must take into account other peoples’ lives. You cannot look at rights from one side. They must be balanced so that everybody’s rights are looked into."
}