HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 174963,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/174963/?format=api",
"text_counter": 346,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Abdikadir",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": {
"id": 1,
"legal_name": "Abdikadir Hussein Mohamed",
"slug": "abdikadir-mohammed"
},
"content": "Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise to support this Bill. From the outset, I wish to thank Members of the Committee on Administration of Justice and Legal Affairs for the support that they gave to this process. This time, they had agreed from the word \"go\" that they would work as a team to support the Constitution review process, because we found it as the only one and core function of the Committee on Administration of Justice and Legal Affairs. In that function, we are most glad to have the support, encouragement and leadership of the Minister for Justice, National Cohesion and Constitutional Affairs. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I believe that this House can be proud of the record that it has so December 16, 2008 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 4129 far in terms of moving this process forward, in a very consultative way. The House has so far passed the road-map to the Constitutional amendment, officially called the Kenya Constitution Review Act so far. I think it was assented to by the President recently. Thereafter, the House went through a very elaborate consultative process to come to the point where, earlier in the day, Members agreed that they will move forward with this process. This process has been on-going for more than a decade and a half. During that time, this country has felt pressure and shed tears over this process. We are happy that this time, the process is being anchored on the Constitution. We are also happy that other than just anchoring this process in the Constitution, this Parliament has agreed to piggy bank on that anchoring, reforms that are necessary to allow this process to move forward. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the reforms as far as the Electoral Commission of Kenya (ECK) is concerned, are not merely to disband it. They are essentially to bring a new institution. But more crucial, is the cause of the critical role that, that institution will play in the Constitution-making process itself when we go to the referendum. So, by the time that we have the referendum, we will have an institution that meets international standards and has the full support and confidence of the people of Kenya. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in the same vein, we have piggy banked on this Constitution, an amendment that creates a special court to deal with issues arising out of the Constitution-making process. We are aware of the ruling of Njoya and six others, and the issues raised by Justice Ringera as far as the Constitution-making process is concerned. We are aware that the Judiciary will have vested interests as far as the Constitution-making process is concerned. To guard against this process being derailed by any other institution, Parliament has seen it fit that a special tribunal or court to deal with this, that has limited jurisdiction, yet has seniority in jurisdiction to be able to solve issues on this matter, has been set up. Finally, there is the issue of the Boundaries Commission. This country has a dilemma in the sense that we have on the one side, large populated areas that need more representation and on the other hand, we have sparsely, yet, large areas that require adequate representation. One constituency in the northern region will be the same size as Central Province, Western Province and Nyanza Province combined. They provide special problems for representation. On the other hand, we have constituencies in Nairobi that have remained eight from 1963 to date. So, we have large populations that give specific problems for representation. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the work that this Commission will do is to help Parliament, so that we can on the one hand, help representation for those seriously populated areas, so that the issue of \"one man one vote\" has relevance, while on the other hand, look at the special interests required and situations that face most Members of Parliament from sparsely populated areas. These are areas that really need representation, because they are the least developed, most marginalised and the largest. They essentially require as much representation as the other areas. For example, a typical constituency in Nairobi is about ten square kilometres. One can walk from one end to the other in a couple of minutes. A typical constituency, in the northern region, is more than 10,000 square kilometres. Some of them are up to 40,000 square kilometres. An average constituency, if we are to look at an area, would be about 2,000 square kilometres. Essentially, the idea then would be to balance, so that you have people who live in largely populated areas not feeling that they are dis-enfranchised because their votes do not count for as much as those who live in lowly populated areas, yet the converse is not also true. In other countries, this essentially is solved by having a bi-cameral chamber, so that you have two chambers; one dealing specifically on a \"one man one vote\" proportion, and the other will completely have nothing to do with population. The US Congress, for example, has the Senate 4130 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES December 16, 2008 which has 100 Members; two from every State irrespective of population. The State of Wyoming that has about 500,000 people has two Senators, while the State of California that has about 35 million people also has two Senators. On the other side, we have the House of Congress that is based on \"one man one vote.\" So, the same State of Wyoming has only one representative in the House of Representatives, while the State of California has more than 55 in its representation in the Lower House. On our side, those two chambers were brought together in 1966. At that time, we had about 41 Senators and 176 of the Lower House. When they were brought together, this House then went through the process of reviewing those boundaries every ten years. In 1966, North Eastern and Coast Province were seen as one, while the rest of the regions were the way they are right now. In 1966, Coast Province and North Eastern Province had 17 Members of Parliament, while Central Province had 15 Members of Parliament. Today, Coast Province and North Eastern Province have 32 Members of Parliament when they are combined, even though they are different regions right now, while Central Province has 29 Members of Parliament. So, the perception that the North Eastern Province, for example, has extremely benefitted from continuous constituency boundary reviews may not be correct. I would wish that this House knows that we really need to represent the largely populated areas. However, that does not mean that we do not look at the special circumstances, because we are a one chamber Parliament. Having said that, it is up to the people of Kenya to decide on which type of representation they wish to have. The Constitution review process will give direction in that matter. I will be more than happy to support this Bill. Thank you very much."
}