Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1439926,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1439926/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 142,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Homa Bay Town, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Peter Kaluma",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": " Thank you, Hon. Speaker. People who are not related to a child the gender notwithstanding, can mess up a child beyond measure and the control of the courts. There is a good reason as to why we prescribed Section186(4) which they seek to remove. So, I ask Hon. Members to oppose. Secondly, this particular provision is quite substantive to be considered casually within the context of the Statute Law (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill. Again, in the same page 1815 of the Bill you will see a deletion being proposed for Section 186(6)(f). This is very serious. I wish Members of Parliament would look at this provision because it is very critical for the family. Hon. Speaker, it deals with adoption of a child and the provision which they seek to remove is 186(6)(f) which states— “(6) The Court shall not make an adoption order in favour of an applicant or joint applicants if the applicant or joint applicants, or any of them— (f) is a foreign applicant except where the applicant is a biological relative of the child.” What is the problem with this provision? It is protecting our children. We have had cases of child trafficking and organ harvesting sourced from children being moved from one jurisdiction to other. We have cases of child pornography. Why do you want to delete a provision which is securing our children from foreigners unless, they are biological relatives? What protection do those children have after they have moved out of this jurisdiction? These are very fundamental provisions. We are dealing with the rights of a child as protected under Article 53 of the Constitution. So, if we read it keenly, we cannot delete these provisions. I oppose these two proposed deletions but support other provisions even though they are substantive. Thank you, Hon. Speaker"
}