GET /api/v0.1/hansard/entries/205079/?format=api
HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 205079,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/205079/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 311,
    "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. Temporary Deputy Chairman, Sir, I oppose this amendment. The proposal in the law, as has been ably stated, only covers civil cases. What the law simply says is this: That the statutes of limitation will not apply to civil cases. It is not everybody who will be followed. If you have looted public funds, then you cannot waive the Statutes of Limitation. Today, people are being prosecuted for crimes that they committed more than six years ago. But even if you successfully prove those prosecutions, you may be unable to recover the property. Kenyans are asking about the Kshs150 billion which some people unjustly enriched themselves with from the public coffers. The law is saying \"so long as the money relates to public coffers\" and not other civil debts; mali ya umma, if I may put it that way. This is to enable the State to recover from those who loot from the public. Nobody is exempted. So, let us not instil fear in people. It means that the case will have to be proved against that person. It is not a case of one just being made to pay before proof is made. So, this Parliament ought to decide whether we are for the recovery of public funds or we are standing for those who have unjustly enriched themselves."
}