Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1489028,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1489028/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 246,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Okiya Omtatah",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "The constitutional bar that must be cleared for the removal of the Deputy President from office is high. The Constitution requires that the removal must be well- founded in law. That is why it prescribes the thresholds and it must be objective. It is not a simple matter of numbers in the National Assembly and the Senate. An impeachment is not a vote of no confidence. We must distinguish that. A vote of no confidence is a simple matter with no standards. It is just a political decision that you make. Somebody resigns from office, but he can come back and get the office again. This is an impeachment. Article 150(2) provides that to remove the Deputy President from office, the provisions of Articles 144 and 145 relating to the removal of the President shall apply, with the necessary modifications to the removal of the Deputy President. The Constitution does not anticipate a situation where we apply Article 145 on the removal of the Deputy President without modifying it. The phrase is; “shall apply with necessary modifications.” What modifications has this House, the National Assembly, or Parliament has collectively made to Article 145 before applying it to the Deputy President? Can we impeach the Deputy President using the standard for impeaching the President when we know well that the President is immune to prosecution, therefore, certain standards that apply to him do not apply to the Deputy President? Given that the Deputy President does not enjoy those immunities, how are we protecting him? How are we ensuring that this process is constitutional?"
}