Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1487450,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1487450/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 1995,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Elisha Ongoya",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Sir, and distinguished Senators. The distinguished Senator for Narok County has asked succinct questions. If you look at the Petition, it claimed two things. That the Deputy President has no respect for the Judiciary, which is why he made the allegations that he made against Justice Esther Maina. Secondly, that the Deputy President lied when he said he was going to file a complaint before the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). So, you respond to the Motion as presented. To respond to that, there was no necessity to file this consent because the consent does not address itself to the claim by the Deputy President (DP), that he is going to file a complaint against the Judge. The witness came here and then began taking this court through the judgment of Maina, altering the claim as presented in the Motion, which is why we had now to take him through the issue of the consent. So, we have not presented the consent before this Senate because the Motion as framed did not require the consent to respond to it. However, having said that, my learned colleague, the Mover of the Motion, makes a false statement that a consent does not determine the merits of the matter. In fact, a consent determines the merits of the matter. When you enter a consent and say that the judgment that was rendered by the trial court, you are entering a consent to state a different state of affairs. You are actually vacating that judgment. The trial court had taken the money in question from the DP to the Asset Recovery Agency. The consent took the money from the Asset Recovery Agency back to the DP. That is the substance of the matter. So, the argument by the Mover of the Motion before you, that a consent does not settle the matter on the merits is law upside down. Law upright is that a consent settles the merits of the matter that it addresses. Thank you."
}