Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1211782,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1211782/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 201,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Rarieda, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. (Dr) Otiende Amollo",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "It makes no difference that that was a popular initiative. Even here, the argument will be that if it is a parliamentary initiative, the President is not a Member of Parliament. How will you say that it is a parliamentary initiative and it is initiated by someone outside Parliament? In both cases, whether it is by popular or parliamentary initiative, it passes through Parliament. The second mistake was the President writing to the Speaker. The Speaker is a neutral entity in this House. The person to initiate would be the Leader of the Majority Party, the Leader of the Minority Party or an individual Member. Expressly, the Leader of the Majority Party introduces the Motion, but the Motion reads that it was written to the Speaker. There are already two technicalities that make this initiative run afoul of the law. Let me now examine two things. First is the idea of the leader of official opposition. This is a bad idea. It is not well- founded either in terms of constitutionalism or purpose. It does not take cognisance of Articles 108 and 130. Let us be clear. In this House, there is no Government or opposition as per the Constitution. If you look at Article 130, the national Government comprises of the President, the Deputy President and the Cabinet, not the Leader of the Majority Party or any of you here in Parliament. When we come here as the Minority Party, we do not come here as opposition, we come as the Minority Party. The word “opposition” does not appear anywhere in the text of the Constitution. How can you introduce a leader of a non-existent entity?"
}