Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1381151,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1381151/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 306,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Ugenya, MDG",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. David Ochieng’",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 2955,
        "legal_name": "David Ouma Ochieng'",
        "slug": "david-ouma-ochieng"
    },
    "content": "this new Bill is that a petitioner just needs to tell us whether the matter is pending in any court of law. Do not bring to us the proceedings in a court if a petition is pending in any court of law. Just tell us the case number. That will be sufficient. For now, we ask people to bring the pleadings and the judgment therein. What Parliament requires under this new amendment is telling us the case number of the matter and the court in which matters of the petition are pending. Is it in the commercial or criminal division, and in which part of the country? That will suffice. Three, some people have been saying that the Clerk should not be the one communicating with Petitioners and that the Public Petitions Committee should communicate to petitioners. You can imagine someone who petitions Parliament about tsetse flies today and maybe the petition is not in the form or manner Parliament requires. Why would a Petition go to the Public Petitions Committee for it to look at whether the petition is eligible? We, as the Procedure and House Rules Committee of this House, think that the Clerk of the Assembly should have some residual powers to summarily deal or communicate with petitioners on matters where etitions do not meet form. For example, where the Petition does not disclose the petitioner. Why would the Clerk take that kind of petition to the Committee? Why go to the Committee if it is very clear to the Clerk that this matter is ongoing in court and what is being given to Parliament is not sufficient? Therefore, we are retaining the role of the Clerk. Initially, someone proposed that the Committee be the one to communicate to petitioners. All communications that come from Parliament and even Committees, to the Judiciary and the Presidency or the Executive, pass through the Clerk and are done under the hand of the Clerk, and not under the hand of the Committee. Therefore, we are retaining the residual powers of the Clerk to communicate to Petitioners whatever decision we make as a House or Committee. The matters upon which anybody petitions Parliament are diverse. They are not one or two. They are as wide as the world is. What we are saying is that a petition goes to the Committee once it is processed and allowed to go through. The Committee alone cannot make the final decision on a matter in a petition. Once the Committee sits and deliberates on a petition, the Report of that Committee should be brought back to this House. A petition cannot end at the Committee that may say it looked at the matter and thought a certain position was right to take and then the matter ends there. Whether the Public Petitions Committee approves or investigates, a Petition must be brought back to this House to decide one way or the other. The hallmark of this amendment is just to make it easier. I want to tell Kenyans not to struggle with very many letters when this amendment passes today. Just go to the website of Parliament or come to Parliament and you will get a standard form that has what one needs to provide—a checklist, a place to sign and contacts, then you submit it. You can submit it online. You do not have to travel to Nairobi if you are in Lodwar or Ugenya. We will receive it, process it normally and get back to you on the address, telephone number or email you provided on that form. As simple as that. We also want to make it easier for the Speaker of the Assembly to process petitions. That is why we are saying the Speaker should have a secretariat or an office. From here, the Speaker will look at petitions and communicate telling the Petitioner whether their Petition was received and complied with the rules. On the other hand, whether it has been committed to the relevant Committee without the petition going to the Committee that will come back to say it has received the Petition. There should be a proper back-and-forth or a feedback mechanism that helps us do this. The Procedure and House Rules Committee made a couple of amendments to the Bill to make it easier. We are going to modify the amendment that requires Petitioners to include only the case number and the name of the court as I have said. We will maintain the Clerk’s role in looking at admissibility and compliance with the rules required. We will also retain the The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor"
}