Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 118292,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/118292/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 422,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "The alternative to a local tribunal would have been an overhaul of our system. This Government is still not interested in reforms. I resigned as a Minister when I realized that all the reforms we would agree upon, the same members of Government would sabotage them. When I talk of Government, I mean the Executive. They would sabotage the efforts the Ministry I was in charge of was spearheading, and I decided I had no business engaging in a zero-sum game. It is better to be able to stand in the position I am standing in, exposing the reluctance of the Government, the refusal by the Government to fulfill its pledges to Kenyans, to fulfill its role. A government that cannot protect the security of its people is not worth being called a Government. Failing to institute a mechanism, namely the local tribunal, to try the suspects of the post-election violence, is clearly a dereliction of duty by the Government. It is an indication that the Executive--- When I talk of Government, I may be including Parliament. At least, a few Members of Parliament are making efforts. Parliament, as an institution, is also likely to be counted among the anti reform forces by its conduct during the debate of this Bill. I am pleading with hon. Members that we should rise up to the occasion. We are not paid to run away from debate we do not like. We are paid to be here to make our views known for posterity. Let them be recorded on the Hansard. Let us hear those who oppose the local tribunal and why they would not want it. It is cowardly of the Executive, of the Ministers, of MPs to stay away from the Chamber, to sit on the fence and not to come here and clearly declare on which side they are, whether they are for a local tribunal or not, and the reasons thereof. They need to tell us if we do not enact a local tribunal, what other mechanism is there? When we say that we should put reconciliation first, are we saying that reconciliation must be founded on opaqueness, or that it should be founded on obliteration of the rights of others? True reconciliation can only be based on truth and justice, and justice demands that the victims of post-election violence have their day in court, and are able to meet their tormentors, or the suspects, and prove their cases against them or hear the suspects over their defences. We cannot have true reconciliation that is based on ignoring the rights of others, especially the victims, and on ignoring the law. What right do we have as politicians, members of the Executive and as Parliament to ask the victims to go without redress? It is only a victim who can say in a court of law or before a tribunal that I forgive the perpetrator. We have no moral right to try to gloss over these matters and bury all these crimes without letting the victims have a say. It is clear that we may have forgotten our role. Our role is to represent the people and not ourselves."
}