GET /api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1484044/?format=api
HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 1484044,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1484044/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 137,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Eric Gumbo",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "application, defined conflict of interest as a situation where one is confronted by two different interests, so that serving one interest would be against the other. Mr. Speaker, Sir, there has not been any conflict of interest that has been, even in the least, mentioned by the objector to the participation of Hon. James Orengo, SC. Finally, has there been an indication as to any prejudice that could be occasioned by the participation of the Hon. James Orengo, SC, before this House this afternoon? To the best of my recollection, none has been mentioned. Is Counsel, for instance, saying that the participation of the Hon. James Orengo, SC, before the proceedings in this House would be such that it would fundamentally impair their defense when they get the opportunity to present the case? I am just asking myself. That has not been said. In any case, if that was to be the case and the fear that has been presented, then as advocates, as Counsel, we operate within clear and defined rules. Those rules are meant to ensure that a party before this House, just like would be a party before any court or any other forum, does not suffer or does not have a compromise to their rights to fair hearing under Article 50. In the absence of any prejudice that has been mentioned before you, we urge that that objection be dismissed. I have also had occasion to look at the case that was referred to by my learned friend, Mr. Njiru. With respect, that case turned on two critical points. The first one being, that the participation of the Hon. James Orengo, SC, as a Senator in that matter was said to have the potential of compromising his participation in the Senate proceedings because then he was a Senator. However, he is not a Senator as we speak. That marks a significant difference or departure between what led to the finding in that position and what we have before you. The judge in that specific matter also went on to add that there must also be established a question or a fact of benefit. Again, I reiterate that no indication, evidence or even assertion has been presented before this House to suggest that the Hon. James Orengo, SC, has in any way benefited by being in this House participating as Counsel. With that, Mr. Speaker, Sir, we urge that that objection be dismissed. I am most obliged."
}