Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1375508,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1375508/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 376,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Suba North, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Caroli Omondi",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "thirds of all of the county delegations. When I read the report in paragraph 201 f, g, h and i, where they made a statement, I realised that the establishment of new counties requires a referendum because such an act would interfere with the territory of Kenya. Nothing would be further from the truth. I have looked at Articles 5 and 6 of the Constitution which clearly define what the territory of Kenya is. A territory of a country is defined by reference to external boundaries of the neighbouring countries not by what the boundaries are within the county, which is where the boundaries for counties are. In my view, it will be wrong to adopt the Report without any amendment with such a glaring misrepresentation. That is not what the law says. They are also saying that we need a referendum, but that is not the correct position. A referendum is clearly defined under Articles 255 and 256 of the Constitution. You can only go to a referendum when you are dealing with counties; if you want to change the objects, principles and structure of devolved units. In this regard, creating new counties does not interfere with objects under Article 174, principles under Article 175 and the structure under Article 176. The Structure is simply that there shall be a county government for each county consisting of a county assembly and a county executive. There is no other structure; so it is wrong. I think we need to amend some of these resolutions and have accuracy in the Report. Even though it is a product of negotiated settlement, we cannot allow it to be adopted with such misrepresentations. Secondly, I made a presentation on party discipline as well as registration of new political parties. My presentation has not been covered here. I would like it to go on record that if you read the Chapters of this Report on party discipline, there is a lot of confusion on whether we are a presidential or a parliamentary system. And if we are a parliamentary system, which one are we? The presentation here is a situation of elections of political parties and not of individuals who are elected by individual mandate from the people. We should look at what happens in pure presidential systems which is the system of governance that we have in this country. We need to adopt mechanisms that encourage party discipline within a presidential system. We cannot be importing practices and norms of parliamentary systems into a presidential system without understanding what they are. I am trying to say this: in a parliamentary system, if you are elected as an individual in that party, there are certain freedoms and independents that you enjoy. If the party is elected and it nominates you on the basis like in South Africa, there are certain limitations that you have. In a presidential system, you have a direct mandate from the people and a voice to vote as you wish in this House, only taking account of the interest of your people. That is what happens in America and all the other jurisdictions with presidential systems. That is where we should go. Finally, because of the bad manners of many people in the Republic of Kenya and the problems that we are having, I proposed that it is essential to institute nationhood science so as to promote the values and principles under Article 10. I have not seen it captured in the Report. However, I want it to go to the records of this House that I strongly feel that we should introduce civic education, entrepreneurship and other things that will inculcate the national values and principles under Article 10 of the Constitution in our young ones before they get spoilt and mess up our country."
}