Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1200585,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1200585/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 337,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. (Prof.) Tom Ojienda, SC",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, Sen. Cherarkey has spoken to a matter before the Supreme Court. He has slightly given accolades to the courts on a matter, which behoves the Senate to point to and discuss. This is a matter touching on Petition No.24 of 2019 and a consolidated Petition No.27 of 2019, which was delivered before the Supreme Court on Friday. There is a problem and we must speak to it as jurists. In the decision of the Supreme Court, there is an analysis on the powers of this House. The Supreme Court then classifies the powers of the county assembly under Article 185(3) and the powers of the Senate under Article 96. In my view, that is rather erroneous because one is secondary for the Senate and the other primary for the county assembly. Sen. Cherarkey has correctly said that this House has both primary and secondary oversight over counties. It also has the powers, as the Supreme Court held, to summon governors in the event that there is a question they need to respond to. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the question of secondary oversight may lead to confusion and some thinking that a matter can only find itself before this House if the county assembly has dealt with it. That is incorrect. It is a matter that the Committee on Justice, Legal Affairs and Human Rights needs to consider and clarify. That clarity will enable the public to know that this House has the authority to deal with all matters of oversight under Article 96(3)."
}