Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1223530,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1223530/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 47,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "of the Minority Whip and that her human rights as provided for under Article 47 of the Constitution have been violated. She further alleged that her proposed removal from the office of the Minority Whip went against fair administrative action and was a violation of the rules of natural justice. She claims that she was never- (1) Given any notice whatsoever of the Azimio PG meeting in order to prepare; (2) Informed of the reason for which a charge has been brought; (3) Given an opportunity to hear the charge and defend against any charge that may be levelled against her; (4) Allowed to have legal representation; and (5) Given a written decision of the meeting. The second ground is that she was elected as a leader to represent the Jubilee Party at the Azimio la Umoja PG meeting encompassing all the constituent partners in the Coalition and that it would be fair and procedural for any attempt to remove her to follow the same process. The Jubilee Party and herself were not aware of the alleged Azimio PG meeting as the due process was not followed in the convening of the said meeting. Thirdly, that, the Jubilee Party is still in the Azimio Coalition and it has not exited the Coalition. Fourth, that, there has been unprocedural removal of Jubilee members from committees of the Senate, the most recent case being the removal of Sen. (Prof.) Margaret Kamar, MP, from the Senate Business Committee. Fifth, that, the Jubilee Party should be recognized as the third largest party with rights similar to those enjoyed by other parties and further that the existing coalition agreement must be taken into account before any removal from office. Hon. Senators, I am clear in my mind that at the time the Senate Minority Leader rose on a point of order to demand an immediate Communication from the Speaker on what he claimed to be a simple and straight straightforward matter, he was not aware of the foregoing correspondences which the office of the Speaker was seized of. It cannot be gainsaid that the Office of the Speaker must accord due respect to all Senators and must, at the very least, give due consideration to any matter brought to the attention of the Speaker by any Senator. The outcome of such due consideration is, of course, a separate matter altogether. Hon. Senators, having considered the letter of the Senate Minority Leader, the annexures thereto and the letters by Sen. Abdul Haji and Sen. Dullo, the following questions commend themselves for my determination- i). What is the procedure, including the timelines required of the Speaker when he receives a communication on changes in the political leadership in the Senate as contemplated in Standing Orders Nos. 22 and 23 of the Senate Standing Orders? ii). What options are available to the Speaker where proposed changes in the political leadership in the Senate are contested by an aggrieved political party, Senator or Senators?"
}