Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1407163,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1407163/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 87,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Tharaka, UDA",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. George Murugara",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": " Thank you, Hon. Speaker. I rise to oppose this Motion. I have various reasons why I urge the House to reject it, and some of them are purely based on law. The Motion in certain respects, breach Statutes and as such, this House cannot condone such. Hon. Speaker, if you allow me to move since I have limited time, I wish to draw the attention of the House to the affidavit in support of the Motion. It is sworn by the Mover of the Motion before a Commissioner for Oaths. It is also very clear from the Motion that the affidavit was drawn by a Law firm of Messrs Bryan Khaemba, Kamau and Company Advocates. It then becomes apparent on the face of the record that the affidavit was commissioned by the same Advocate who drew it, Mr. Bryan Mandila Khaemba of the Law Firm of Bryan Khaemba, Kamau and Company Advocates. That being the case then, this Affidavit is in direct contravention of the Oaths and Statutory Declarations Act, Chapter 15 of the Laws of Kenya. The offended Section is 4(1) of the Act. It expressly, prohibits any person who is administering the oath not to have any interest in the matter. Having done so, it then means that the affidavit in support, is faulty and the Hon. Speaker has the discretion to expunge it from the records. If that is done, it then means that the affidavit and all the supporting documents go with it. That would mean that in front of us, is a Motion that is not supported by any evidence. The consequence of that is that the Motion cannot stand as it is, and should fail. And for that reason, and I reserve the right to raise this at any stage, I urge the House to reject it for being in contravention of the Statutes. Secondly, it is equally important that as we debate, we also know that this House is not a guillotine. A guillotine for those who do not know was an Instrument used for execution during the French Revolution in 18th Century. Its purpose was to chop off everybody’s head when it was brought before that particular Tribunal. We must go by what our Constitution says, which is exactly what we have before the House. What does a Cabinet Secretary do? The offences that we have here, are all on allegations of having approved. He made approvals for certain contracts and disbursements. Under our Constitution and the law, who is the accounting officer? Can a Cabinet Secretary be held responsible for matters that are discharged by an"
}