Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1399581,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1399581/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 285,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Olekina",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 407,
        "legal_name": "Ledama Olekina",
        "slug": "ledama-olekina"
    },
    "content": "back to you because you made a complaint? You are a consumer of this Bill, you have complained to the commission, how does the commission write back to you? We need to be able to expand and amend that section because I know this is going to pass. There is a provision which I think is very dangerous and all of us must really pay attention to it. Still on No.7, it says “delegate to another person or body by notice in the Gazette, any of its powers or functions under this act in respect to classes of public officers specified by the commission and that persons or bodies shall be deemed to be responsible for the administration and management of conflict of interest”. That is a very dangerous clause. We are already seeing what is panning out there if you read Article 156 of the Constitution of Kenya where it gives the powers to protect public interest to the Attorney-General. Then when you go to the Attorney-General's Act, you will see that he is now given the powers to delegate and in most cases, he will delegate to the Solicitor General. Mr. Temporary Speaker, a very mischievous government will bypass the Attorney-General and goes to the Solicitor General because the Act gives that person the power to delegate. Who is this person to whom the Commission shall delegate the powers if we have set up a Commission under an Act of Parliament? Why not then either amend that Act of Parliament or do away with it? I would propose that this very dangerous clause be deleted. The independence of a body and everybody out there will, therefore, not be confused with the powers of that commission. Allow that commission to perform its function, but not restrictively. We should not create room for it to be abused by setting up another agency that has delegated powers. Hypothetically, if the powers that be are not happy with the independence of the Commission, then they will just go to the other person who is delegated. It creates room for corruption, which is what we are trying to deal with here. If you read Clause 7 (d) it states- “The Commission shall, in performance of its function under this Act, have the powers to cooperate and collaborate with any public entities or agencies, any foreign governments and international or regional organizations in the management of conflict of interest and enforcement of this Act.” What is it that we do in this House? We have two and, hopefully soon, we will get a third committee on oversight. We have the County Public Accounts Committee (CPAC) and the County Public Investments and Special Funds Committee (CPISF). I would have hoped that now that we are trying to deal with the issue of corruption, incorporate the aspect of these two committees to work there. Why leave out the Senate, yet sometimes we have the Ethics and Anticorruption Commission (EACC) people sitting with us in our committees? Why not then say that even the Senate, so that you can deal with the corruption in the counties? Later on, I hope we will have time, I will be moving my Motion on pending bills. However, if you want to deal with the matter decisively, you have got to create room for this oversight House to work directly with the Commission, to punish these governors and these people who are stealing all this money that belongs to the public. In my view,"
}