HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 195178,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/195178/?format=api",
"text_counter": 159,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Githae",
"speaker_title": "The Assistant Minister, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and Ministry of Local Government",
"speaker": {
"id": 159,
"legal_name": "Robinson Njeru Githae",
"slug": "robinson-githae"
},
"content": "Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, what has been happening is that, when you accuse somebody of murder and he or she knows it was not murder, and that it was done on the heat of the moment, the accused will plead not guilty. The matter will go to trial, take, may be, seven years but at the end of the day the judge will reduce the charge from murder to manslaughter. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, this week I read in the newspapers that a husband killed his wife because she received a short text message from a lover. Clearly, that case was not murder. It was manslaughter. However, it had to go through all the stages of the system, only for the judge to reduce the charge from murder to manslaughter. If there had been a plea-bargain, this would not have taken place. The fellow would have said, \"Yes, it is true that I killed my wife. I had not planned it and it was not premeditated. It was on the heat of the moment. I was annoyed when I saw the short text message from her lover. She did not give me respect---\" Things like that. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, there are many cases of this nature. The other one we read about in the media is of a person who comes home at an unusual time and finds his wife committing adultery. The man proceeds to kill the her lover or something like that. Again, that is not murder. It was not premeditated. There was no malice aforethought. It is only that the fellow happened to come to his home at the wrong time, and witnessed what was happening. I think plea-bargaining would take care of such cases. It can only improve our legal system. My view on this, which I would like to recommend to the Attorney-General, is that plea- bargaining can also include compensation to a person. That is right, but, I think, the Attorney- General can also provide for an amount of money to be paid to the State. This happens in the United States of America (USA) and the United Kingdom (UK), where an accused is told that if they do not plead guilty the magistrate or judge is authorised to specify an amount of money that they you will pay to compensate the State for wasting its time. I think we also need something like this. There should be an amount of money to be paid to the State in addition to that to be paid to the 850 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES May 6, 2008 victim. There is a very clear case and everybody knows that this has happened. However, for some reasons, I think Africans do not accept realities and the truth. You will find a case where we can see clearly that a particularly person is guilty, but continues denying it. So, he goes to trial. It takes a lot of time of courts and prosecutors. Other cases cannot be heard in good time. So, if we were to do so, the State will also get some money. Nobody is a loser. The other view that I would like the Attorney-General to take into account is that although the Bill is talking of compensation in a plea bargain, I think even in other cases, there should also be an amendment. After a person has been convicted, the victim is paid some money, for example, assault. If today you are charged with assault and convicted, then it is upon you to go back to sue the fellow who assaulted you in a civil case. It would have been cheaper if the magistrate or judge was allowed to say: \"Yes, you assaulted this person. The court also rules that you pay Kshs10,000 or Kshs20,000 to the person who has been assaulted. Again, this will reduce backlog in our civil cases. At the moment, you are forced to do double work. First of all, you give evidence in a criminal court and then, again, you have to file a civil suit. I think that just wastes time. The other good thing about the Bill is the fact that, during sentencing, the time that somebody has been in custody is taken into account. It is only last week that a person who had stayed in custody for seven years was found innocent. Again, we have no provision for compensating such a person. In other systems, for example, the United Kingdom (UK) or the United States of America (USA), if you have been in custody and found not guilty, the state compensates you for the time that you wasted in custody. Even where you are convicted, but, on appeal, you succeed, again, the state compensates you because of the time you have wasted in custody. I would like to recommend to the Attorney-General to also think of bringing these amendments. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, now that the Attorney-General is in a good mood of making very good amendments, may I also suggest to him that he also needs to copy what the other systems are doing. At the moment, our jails are congested. Why is it so? They are congested because once you are convicted, you are taken to jail immediately. In other systems, the prison authorities are asked by the magistrates or judges: \"When will there be vacancy or space available in jail.\" Then you are told: \"Although you have been convicted today, you will not be taken to jail immediately.\" You are told to report within six or eight months. The statistics we have is that in nine out of ten cases, the people who have actually been convicted actually report. For example, in the USA, there is a famous musician who was convicted, but because the jails were congested, he was told to report to jail after eight months. If we take this kind of innovative systems, this will decongest our jails. This is because, say, you have been convicted and jailed for two months, if you are told to report to prison after eight months, surely, where will you go? The sentence is only two months. The issue of somebody not turning up to jail should not arise. The statistics is in our favour. That fear that if you are convicted and told to report after so many months you do not do so, is actually not there. So, now that the Attorney-General is in a good mood of making good amendments, could he also look into this issue? Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I think this plea-bargaining can also help the tax system. We must commend the KRA. They have really saved this country. Everybody had fears that because of the clashes that happened after the general elections, the revenue collected by the Government would go down. However, the revenue has not gone down. So, whatever witchcraft or \" kamuti \" the KRA is using, it is working. It should continue with it because revenue for the Government is actually increasing. Where KRA sends, for example, Kshs1 billion to a company that produces alcohol, they could sit down and say: \"Look, instead of paying us Kshs1 billion, pay us Kshs200 million. Instead of us going to court and taking ten years for a ruling to be made, pay us such amount and so May 6, 2008 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 851 on.\" So, I think even in plea bargaining this should recommended to the KRA. They will get more revenue in this way rather than taking people to court. People will also start paying their taxes because they will know that they can negotiate the amounts due. This is good for everybody. We need as much revenue as we can for the Government to be able to carry on its very ambitious programme. I am also happy that the plea bargain does not include sexual offences. This is right. We know that it has been happening. For example, we have had cases where somebody has been accused of raping a young girl and the parents are compensated. They accept the compensation and then withdraw the case. I think it is only fair that this should not be allowed to proceed, although, at the moment, it is proceeding on informally. We must protect our young girls from sexual molesters. So, I think it is a good thing. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, there is also a provision where the Attorney-General has been authorized to include other offences where plea bargaining is not acceptable. I would recommend to him that he includes treason. I think treason should not be included in plea bargain. Crimes of genocide and crimes against humanity should also not be included in plea bargaining. These offences go beyond the individual. They also affect the country. So, there are enough safeguards. The fears of the Law Society of Kenya have been over- emphasized. I do not see these new rules being misused because even now it is happening, but informally. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, with those few remarks, I beg to support."
}