Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 182625,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/182625/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 455,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Abdikadir",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 1,
        "legal_name": "Abdikadir Hussein Mohamed",
        "slug": "abdikadir-mohammed"
    },
    "content": "Mr. Chairman, Sir, I beg to move:- THAT, Clause 36 of the Bill be amended in Subclause (3) by deleting paragraph (a) and substituting therefor the following new paragraph- (a) inform the applicant that the application does not qualify for amnesty. Mr. Chairman, I would again seek your indulgence just to indicate the reason for that proposed amendment. If you look at Clause 36, Subclause 3(a), it says:- October 23, 2008 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 3003 \"After an investigation carried out under Subsection 2, the Commission may- (a) inform the applicant that the application does not relate to an act of gross human rights violation.\" In other words, the assumption is that only cases dealing with gross human rights violations are worthy of consideration for amnesty. I would understand where the drafter was coming from. We do not want to flood the Commission with very small and minor cases. So, we want only those weighty ones to be considered. It gives the assumption that you are only forgiven if you are guilty of gross violation, which is really not what the spirit is. For that reason, what we indicated was just to amend it by saying:- \"Inform the applicant that the application does not qualify for amnesty.\""
}