GET /api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1549158/?format=api
HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 1549158,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1549158/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 1084,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Cheruiyot",
    "speaker_title": "The Senate Majority Leader",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13165,
        "legal_name": "Aaron Kipkirui Cheruiyot",
        "slug": "aaron-cheruiyot"
    },
    "content": "of Parliament. It is unfortunate if we continue with the trend of speaking at the spur of the moment and moving away immediately after. I am glad that we are having a conversation about this Bill because the organ of it is how to give life to statutory instruments that have been produced by this House. The legislature is an equal arm in the theology of the existence of Government as prescribed by our Constitution. We have the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary. Many times, I see decisions by the legislature being challenged so casually. I have said times without number in this House that perhaps it has come to a time where we must have a conversation, including with the Judiciary and the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). We need to agree on the threshold within which a judge hearing on a petition before them can overturn the decision of an entire House. This includes in the consideration of whatever issues that have been brought about them. I do not imagine that it was the design of our constitutional architecture for a Bill to go through both Houses of Parliament, go through public participation, assented into law and then the following day, stakeholders who, for one reason or the other, may have certain misgivings about that Bill, move to a court of law, secure an injunction and that is the end of the story. I have seen that many times. There are many Bills that I can quote off the top of mind, including Bills that are matters of public interest. I will cite an example of the Sugar Bill, which we tried to pass here last Session, but the House adjourned. We came back for the 13th Parliament and quickly moved the Bill, and within one and a half years, that Bill had gone through all the systems of Parliament. As we speak, the most critical parts of that Act of Parliament cannot be implemented. Why? This is because an individual, a Kenyan, appeared before one judge, another Kenyan, and all the millions of farmers that depend on sugarcane farming cannot enjoy the proceeds of the work that has been done by the legislature. Madam Temporary Speaker, I do not think that that was the design of our Constitution. There must be a threshold, especially on matters of public interest and things that affect the livelihood of millions of other Kenyans. This is because that is the force of law that Parliament has. This Bill speaks to a very simple provision. Many times, we pass legislation in this House and do not affect the timelines within which certain regulations, for example, are supposed to have been gazette. That is why we are introducing New Clause 24A into the Statutory Instruments Act. This is to make sure that, one, a regulatory-making authority shall make statutory instruments within the period provided for under the enabling legislation. Many times, we pass Bills here, and maybe Members do not take time to read to the final part of the Bill. In the transition clauses, we normally provide the period upon which certain regulations are supposed to be formulated and approved. Most of those timelines are violated and ignored because there is no sanction. People imagine that Parliament said within 90 days of the passage of this Bill, the Cabinet Secretary is"
}