Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 128078,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/128078/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 462,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "happen in one week. The world will not be coming to an end in a week’s time; if at the end of Wednesday, after the hearing, the court--- I am beginning to put myself in a very embarrassing position. For example, if we rule that the appointment, as the Committee has said, was irregular and the court rules that it was regular? Then what next? That will just be embarrassing for this House. Question number four, are the issues in court the same issues that the Committee has dealt with? The answer is “yes”. Therefore, the matter is sub judice . A colleague and a neighbour has said that in order to avoid dictatorship of the Executive, Parliament must assume a leadership role. My question is, would the Parliamentary dictatorship be better than the Executive dictatorship? The answer is “no”. Dictatorship is dictatorship. It does not matter whether it is Parliamentary dictatorship or Executive dictatorship. The fifth question is: Is it proper to impute improper motive on the people who filed the case? It is the right of every citizen to go to court and to claim anything under the sky. It is the right of the court to issue a ruling. Lastly, I stood here very reluctantly because I was a bit embarrassed to see Cabinet Ministers arguing that the matter is sub judice while others were arguing that the matter is not. The Cabinet is collectively responsible to Parliament as far as issues are concerned. I have decided to enter the mud. Really, if a Cabinet Minister was to enforce his docket, it is only proper that if other Cabinet Ministers have opposing views, they shut up and put their views in the cabinet."
}