Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 13571,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/13571/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 623,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Imanyara",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 22,
        "legal_name": "Gitobu Imanyara",
        "slug": "gitobu-imanyara"
    },
    "content": "Constitution.” Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, an attempt to amend the Constitution otherwise than in the manner in which it is provided for in the Constitution itself undermines and breaches this fundamental principle of our Constitution. I say this with tremendous respect to my Senior Counsel, the Minister for Justice, National Cohesion and Constitutional Affairs, who has done a tremendous job shepherding this new Constitutional dispensation to the point at which we are. My main fear is that this Bill does breach Standing Order No. 47; it does breach the separation of powers doctrine; it does infringe on the right of the Supreme Court of Kenya to determine an issue that is before it, and it is not in good faith. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I will give you reasons under the three arms that I have spoken about, starting by giving you the fact that, to add on to what hon. Mungatana said, regarding the omnibus provisions of amending the Constitution. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in this regard, we are fortunate enough because we have institutional memory in the form of a book published by none other than the Clerk of this National Assembly that examines all Constitutional Amendment Bills since 1963 to the year 2008. Mr. Gichohi, in his book “The Speaker’s Rulings, 1963 to 2008” has actually examined every single constitutional amendment up to 2008, when we brought in the new Constitution. The conclusion he arrives at is that there has not been one single occasion when we have amended the Constitution in more than one place in one Constitutional Amendment Bill. Every Constitutional Amendment Bill must come separately for the very good reasons that the Minister for Lands has mentioned. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Standing Orders themselves require us to obey the usages of the ages. That is the only way in which we can build valid precedents in the manner in which we operate the business of this House and, also, reliably know how to behave tomorrow when we are amending the laws of the land. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, if you would want me to take you through briefly all the amendments and what happened in each one of them, you will see that there has not been one occasion--- I will be happy to go through this with the Minister for Justice, National Cohesion and Constitutional Affairs to point out to him that to continue on the basis of three amendments in one, as he proposes, is to effect far reaching breaches of the traditions of this House, the usages of this House and to undermine the most important principle of the new constitutional order, which is to uphold the Constitution that we fought so hard for. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Minister and I have been on different sides of this constitutional dispensation debate for a very long time, but on this one, we are in agreement---"
}