Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1480988,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1480988/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 221,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Cherarkey",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13217,
        "legal_name": "Cherarkey K Samson",
        "slug": "cherarkey-k-samson"
    },
    "content": "If today you have ungazetted polling stations all over, rigging happens, and ballot papers are stuffed. The worst thing that happens to a country is to have the wrong person in a seat because they will not serve. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, on the issue of knowingly or intentionally interfering, altering, or intentionally causing another person to interfere or alter declared results--- Also, causing another person to interfere or alter declared results. We did it in 2007, and we knew the consequences when people declared themselves winners, which is unfortunate and must be punished. This is why, in my opening remarks, which I will repeat, the challenge we have in this country is not a lack of institutions; it is a lack or deficit of trust and belief in independent institutions. For example, if another person interferes or alters declared results or intentionally interferes with the results, it is a serious electoral offence. We know it can even plunge the country into chaos. Imagine if we had two presidential candidates running almost concurrently. If we were respecting the IEBC because if we have that trust, it becomes easy for another person to interfere or declare results. When you look at the amendment of Section 6, the report's upshot—which I want to run through in quick succession so that I can conclude with this part—is a return to keeping the amendment under written law. What we need to do is vet the staff that are there in polling stations. Section 6 - “(b) permits any person whom they know or have reasonable cause to believe to be able to read or write to vote in the manner provided for persons unable to read or write” Some people are disabled, and others are old and cannot read and write. We need an amendment so that we do not disenfranchise this kind of voter. They are common in our villages, and they might want to vote for Sen. Wakili Sigei, Sen. Tabitha Mutinda, or Sen. Cherarkey, but they can only express it, so how do we ensure that their vote is secure? Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, Clause 6(c) of the Bill – “permits any person whom they know or have reasonable cause to believe not to be visually impaired or a person with disability to vote in the manner provided for persons who are visually impaired or persons with disability, as the case may be.” These are PwDs. We need to work with disability organisations. Clause 6(d) “Wilfully prevents any person from voting at the polling station at which they know or have reasonable cause to believe such person is entitled to vote. (e) wilfully rejects or refuses to count any ballot paper which they know or have reasonable cause to believe is validly cast for any candidate in accordance with the provisions of such written law.” The process is clear when a ballot paper is being displayed. When you tick outside the box, does it invalidate that ballot paper? We need a ruling because, sometimes, there are more rejected ballot papers than valid ballot papers or invalid ones; how do you classify when people tick two boxes or put an X or a tick? Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, Section 6(f) – The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Director, Hansard and AudioServices, Senate."
}