Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1514157,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1514157/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 540,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Ainabkoi, UDA",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Samuel Chepkong’a",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Following those developments, the National Assembly and the NG-CDF Board appealed against the judgement in the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal in the Civil Appeal No. 92 of 2015 partially allowed the appeal. However, in Petition No.1 of 2018, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court decision in its judgement delivered on 8th August 2022, affirming that the CDF Act 2013 was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court held that a constituency union of representation is not a service delivery unit but an electoral unit. It is set for the purpose of voting for Members of Parliament and other elected offices. Pursuant to the High Court's judgement in Petition No. 71 of 2013, the National Assembly enacted the NG-CDF Act of 2015 to address the issues raised by the High Court and align the Fund with the constitutional framework. Despite those efforts to align the Act with the Constitution, the NG-CDF Act of 2015 faced a fresh legal challenge in the High Court in Constitutional Petition No. 178 of 2016,Wanjiru Gikonyo v. National Assembly & Others. The High Court delivered its judgement on 20th September 2024, declaring the NG-CDF Act of 2015 unconstitutional, together with the amendments made in 2022 and 2023. All of them were declared unconstitutional. The High Court, in its judgement, stated clearly that the constituency is not a service delivery unit but an electoral unit, affirming the decision delivered by the Supreme Court. The second thing that the High Court stated in its judgement is that NG-CDF violates the principle of separation of powers by assigning executive functions to Members of Parliament whose primary constitutional role is legislation. Again, this was a total misunderstanding by the High Court. We made every effort to explain to them how a The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor."
}