GET /api/v0.1/hansard/entries/128101/?format=api
HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 128101,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/128101/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 485,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Mungatana",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 185,
        "legal_name": "Danson Buya Mungatana",
        "slug": "danson-mungatana"
    },
    "content": "Mr. Speaker, Sir, I listened very carefully to hon. M. Kilonzo, Senior Counsel, when he was presenting his case before this House. I want to invite Mr. Speaker to see that in the most important aspect of his presentation, he failed to discharge the evidential burden that is upon his shoulders. If you look at Standing Order 80(4), it says:- “A Member alleging that a matter is sub-judice shall provide evidence to show that paragraphs (2) and (3) are applicable.” Mr. Speaker, Sir, Paragraph 3 says that the proceedings must be active. What we expected is not just a filed chamber summons that says that we have gone to court. How many cases were filed on the same day? Going to court does not mean that, that matter is active in court. Going to court simply means that the matter has been brought before the court. We expected, by way of discharging his evidential burden today, to have brought a court order that either has given him a stay or whoever has filed a stay, or has given a date for hearing of those proceedings. There is no date that has been tabled before the House. In fact, he took a long time to read the proceedings so that he can confuse this House. But we have seen through that! There was no evidence presented before this House to show that this matter has a date in court. In fact, the first order that has been sought in the chamber summons is that it should be heard ex-parte in the first instance. They are not asking for a date at all. They have gone on to say that they want conservatory or temporary orders and so on, but they do not even ask for a date. I invite you to see that there are no active proceedings before the court. Mr. Speaker, Sir, I also want to say something else. He is a senior lawyer and he knows that it is not enough to discharge evidential burden by standing at the bar and giving evidence yourself. He stood here and told us that he understands that the matter will come for hearing on 15th September. We need proper evidence. An advocate prosecuting a matter cannot be the same advocate giving evidence and saying that he has discharged the evidential evidence that is cast upon him. So, I invite the Chair to consider that as of now, we do not have any evidence of active proceedings before the court. Secondly and lastly, the person who alleges that the matter is sub judice has the burden to show that discussions of that matter before this House will prejudice fair trial. The mood of this House and that of the nation is that there will be no discussions. In fact, once an hon. Member moves the Motion and it is seconded, we will vote on it. There will not be any debate. So, it is already decided. So, the question of saying that we will have discussions--- There will be no discussions."
}