Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1278844,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1278844/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 245,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mbeere North, DP",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Ruku GK",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "The other important point is that the Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2009 takes care of drug dealing, human trafficking, wildlife poaching, financing of terrorism, and other offences. The Act is very well-formed and precise. It takes care of those offences. Therefore, amending the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act by changing the definition of the term “economic crime” will not augur well. Instead, it will end up diluting the intent and purpose of the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act. The other important thing to mention is the fact that proceeds of crime and corruption usually end up in many countries in the West. However, those countries are ranked as the least corrupt nations in the world on the Corruption Perceptions Index. Whoever comes up with the Corruption Perceptions Index is taking nations like Kenya for a ride. They act as if we have not gone to school or attended any class. They act as if we do not know the parameters which are used. Proceeds of crime and corruption cannot be deposited in your country and utilised within your economy, and then you claim to be one of the least corrupt nations in the world. I do not know whether this is a parliamentary term, but that is nonsensical. They take African nations for granted as if we are fools. We are not fools. Those international fora must be made aware so that nations which allow such money within their financial systems are ranked as the most corrupt in the world. I only want to point out that if the definition of “economic crime” is changed in the objects and reasons of the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act No.3 of 2003, it will affect the entire Act, and we will be required to change it. Since this Bill has not touched on the objects and reasons for that Act, we need to re-look at the clause on page 1092, which proposes the amendment of the definition of the term “economic crime”. We need to take care of that, bearing in mind that the Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2009 takes care of what that amendment aims to achieve. With those many remarks, I propose that this issue be handled during the Committee of the whole House, and an amendment be proposed. I will do that during the Committee of the whole House."
}