HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 194647,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/194647/?format=api",
"text_counter": 90,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Abdikadir",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": {
"id": 1,
"legal_name": "Abdikadir Hussein Mohamed",
"slug": "abdikadir-mohammed"
},
"content": "Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, I will refer to Clause 53. It describes the nature of proceedings. It says:- For the purposes of this Part, proceedings or applications for a confistication order or restraint order are civil\". In criminal cases, however, a crime or an offence must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. That is the standard we have. I refer to Clause 53 of the Bill and look at the title of that part which is \"Criminal Forfeiture\" and not \"Civil Forfeiture\". I refer to Clause 53(2) which says:- \"The rules of evidence applicable in civil proceedings shall apply to proceedings on application for a confiscation or a restraint order\". In other words, the rules or the standard of proof required has been lowered if they get those orders and to rob Kenyans of their property. This is, again, unconstitutional and completely unacceptable. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, having known the genesis of this Bill and its history; and having known the history in the last eight years about civil liberties and safeguard of rights that this Anti-Terrorism Bill has caused--- Because, really, this is the Anti-Terrorism Bill reincarnate. It is just a major chunk of the Anti-Terrorism Bill that is being clothed in the name of Anti-Money 950 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES May 8, 2008 Laundering and Proceeds of Crime Bill. Our country's economy is a cash economy. It is a very rudimentary economy. The Bills that are passed in the USA, like the one I referred to, or in the UK which is called the Proceeds of Crime Act (2002), appear within a regime of law and an economy that has enough safeguards. First of all, it is read in terms of its economy. They have plastic money mostly, databases and most of the transactions in any way are captured within the economy. They also have safeguards in terms of privacy laws, consumer laws and human rights to stop the excesses that would otherwise have been caused by such legislation. We do not have the same here. We have a cash economy! Very minute population deals with banks and most people deal with cash. We have absolutely no privacy laws in terms of looking at the privacy of people's data. We have very little consumer protection. This would be akin to leaving an elephant to run amok in a China shop. Finally, Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, the cost of this Bill to financial institutions will be so exorbitant. It will make every transaction costly. In fact, it will be more than triple because of complying with this rule every time one has to report on those transactions. For all these reasons, I am glad that the Minister said that he will refer this Bill to the Departmental Committee on Finance, Planning and Trade. This Bill ought not to pass in the current form. The passing of this Bill will create far many more problems than the solutions that the anti-money laundering problems require. There is no doubt that, that anti-money laundering legislation is required. There is no doubt that it needs to be created to address the problem of anti-money laundering. However, this law might not address that problem. This law is a wolf in a sheep's skin. It is the Anti-Terrorism Bill being clothed in this new garb. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, this law requires this country to co-operate with any other jurisdictions on anti-money laundering matters. That is fine! We already have laws that allow us to do extradition. The safeguards in normal extradition are not catered for here. For example, admissibility of evidence. If we had a banana republic, and any of our neighbours sent us evidence as a result of torture that would not have been admissible in our courts; if we were to pass this Bill, we will be more than happy to accept it and also use it for forfeiture. For example, one of the clauses states that if any other country starts an investigation - not even a court order - and requests this country to freeze assets based on that investigation, we should comply. That is untenable! For all those and many other reasons, I believe we should throw out this Bill and ask the Minister to get us home-grown legislation based on the 40 recommendations, plus the nine specific recommendations which are fit for our circumstances. For those reasons, I beg to oppose."
}