Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 201210,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/201210/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 246,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Ms. Karua",
    "speaker_title": "The Minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 166,
        "legal_name": "Martha Wangari Karua",
        "slug": "martha-karua"
    },
    "content": " Mr. Speaker, Sir, I am on page four - Section 23(4). The following Section which sought to confer the powers, privileges and immunities of police officers on the Director and investigators of Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission (KACC) in the performance of their functions, was deleted. So, clearly, the President's intention is to bring back the Section that seeks to confer powers, privileges and immunities of police officers on the Director and investigators of KACC. He now proposes:- \"The provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Evidence Act, the Police Act and any other law conferring on the police the powers, privileges and immunities necessary or expedient for the detection, prevention and investigation of offences shall, so far as they are not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, apply to the Director and an investigator as if in reference to those provisions to a police station, police office or a police officer included reference to the Commission's premises and Director or an investigator\". So, what is the total sum of this? It is conferring on them powers as if they are police officers and their premises are police stations. It is not making them a police station. It is conferring them the same powers. So, what are the amendments by hon. Marende? If you look at (d), it wants us to delete the words \"a police station\" or \"police office\". When you do that--- If you look at the provisions of the Police Act, what powers are we conferring? That is, in my view, a negation of the original intention clearly spelt out in the Memorandum by the President that I have just read. If you also look at (e), the amendment is seeking to delete the words \"the Commission's premises\". Then, you also look at the words \"delete the proviso\". Let us look at the proviso. \"Provided that where in any written law an act is required to be performed by a police office of a specified rank, the Director or an investigator shall be deemed to be a police officer of that rank\". That is like arresting and recording statements. I need not go into it. The total sum of this, Mr. Speaker, Sir,--- I do honestly believe that this is a negation of what the President proposed! What then happens when Parliament negates what the President proposed? That is now why we went to Section 46, Subsection (6), of the Constitution. It says that where you negate what the President has proposed, a two-thirds majority is required. Mr. Speaker, Sir, I want to thank you for according the opportunity for this to be on the HANSARD, among other things. We seek your guidance!"
}