Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1461115,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1461115/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 273,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. M. Kajwang’",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13162,
        "legal_name": "Moses Otieno Kajwang'",
        "slug": "moses-otieno-kajwang"
    },
    "content": "Madam Temporary Speaker, I want to thank Sen. (Dr.) Khalwale. Indeed, as a member of this Committee, if there is important information that has not been brought before this House, then this Motion should be stood down. I am looking at a similar report of a nomination for Dr. Amoth and I am looking at the iPad here. There is an annexure that is 244 pages. It has minutes; it has details. Why is this different and it is a similar process, where we are being called upon to exercise our constitutional and statutory duty to make approvals or appointments to constitutional commissions? This Motion should be deferred and this conversation should stop at this moment until the committee brings us a full report. The report we have is 28 pages. How do we know that justice was served? If it was not for the respect that I have for Sen. (Dr.) Khalwale, how would this House have been informed of those criteria? Madam Temporary Speaker, as I have said, I have gone through this process and this particular process, we came to some conclusions. It was established that a committee had dismissed a former Senator on the basis of lack of experience. I have kept asking that once you have been elected as a Senator or nominated as a Senator, you have sat in this House approving budgets, approving appointments, writing laws, you have sponsored laws; how can a committee then come and tell you that you do not have the requisite experience to become a member of a commission? That is why we are insisting we need to see those annexures to see whether those kinds of arguments found their way in the decision of this committee. I will leave it to the leadership of the House and to your wisdom to decide whether we are proceeding with adequate information and whether we are doing the right thing. However, let me make certain broad comments as that point is still under consideration. Our role does not end with appointments. Our role extends to funding for constitutional commissions. We have been weak and we have allowed that function or that role to go to the National Assembly when Parliament or when the Constitution clearly states that that is the role of Parliament. I want to read Article 249(3) which says that Parliament - and not National Assembly and not Senate –"
}