Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1589606,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1589606/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 142,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Erick Muriuki",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "The Supreme Court of Kenya and the Court of Appeal have in very clear and no uncertain terms forbidden lower courts from granting the kind of order the Governor has brought here today claiming to rely on to scuttle these proceedings. Even where such orders are issued, what does the Supreme Court of Kenya say? It says should those orders be issued in error, then the Court Assembly is entitled to not immediately comply with them. Mr. Speaker, Sir, these are not my words, but of the Supreme Court of Kenya in the Mate decision. Paragraph 95 of that decision found on page eight of our submissions, the Supreme Court says – “It is our understanding that the exceptional circumstances of this case with a complex scenario of justicabilities from contracted standpoints would lend justification to the non-effectuation of contempt orders at the beginning and consequently we would accommodate the reality of there not having been immediately compliance as would otherwise be required.” The Supreme Court is recognizing that sometimes court orders are issued in error and where the effect of those orders is to encumber a legislative House from performing its duties, the Supreme Court is accommodating the reality that those order do not have to be immediately complied with. Mr. Speaker, Sir, on this basis we, therefore, submit that it in the public interest that this House dismisses this view and proceeds to hearing bearing in mind what the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal have said. I want to touch on the issue of forgery that has been alleged in the Governor’s preliminary objection. The only submission I will add to what my colleagues have said-- -"
}