HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 215217,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/215217/?format=api",
"text_counter": 148,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Prof. Anyang'-Nyong'o",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": {
"id": 193,
"legal_name": "Peter Anyang' Nyong'o",
"slug": "peter-nyongo"
},
"content": "Thank you, Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, for giving me an opportunity to contribute to the Media Bill, 2007. I would like to follow in the footsteps of my colleague, Mr. Raila, and make certain remarks about this Bill. This Bill comes at an extremely important time in our history. If you remember well, yesterday on the Order Paper, there was also a proposal by the Minister for Information and Communications to bring an amendment to the Communications Commission of Kenya (CCK) Act. I believe that the Bill that was read for the First Time yesterday ought to be read in tandem with this Bill. In the final analysis, they handle more or less the same issues, in the same area of regulation. I think the House should make laws that are, somehow, coherent, and do not, in the final analysis, contradict each other. The House should be in a position to possess information that will make us good lawmakers. I would plead with the Minister to hold his horse a bit and make sure that, that Bill, having been read for the First Time, goes before the necessary Departmental July 5, 2007 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 2315 Committee together with this Bill. This will ensure that they are read in tandem, so that the Minister can consult the various stakeholders in the media. This will get us the concurrence and understanding of all the stakeholders on the two Bills, rather than lock horns unnecessarily. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would, therefore, like to plead with the Minister to do that. To me, the two Bills are so close to each other that they ought to be read in tandem. Their contents should not, in any way, contradict each other when they are made into law. All of us should be at par in understanding what is going on, so that the Minister is not, in any way, suspected of or accused of any surreptitious submission of Bills to this House which ought to be seen together. That is my first submission regarding this Bill. My second submission regarding this Bill is what we discussed yesterday when Mr. M. Kilonzo raised the issue of constitutionality of the Bill with regard to Section 79 of the Constitution. My humble submission to the Minister is that, rather than make instant decisions on the constitutionality of the Bill and eventually face protracted struggles in court over that matter, I would rather that the issue be properly disposed of before the Committee of this House responsible for information and communication. We should have exhaustive discussions with the Attorney- General on the constitutionality of the Bill before this House is rail loaded into passing a Bill which could easily make us lock horns in the courts on its constitutionality. That is my humble submission as a lawmaker, and somebody who is interested in ensuring that a proper regulatory framework is established in this country for purposes of managing and regulating the media. I, for one, would not say that there should not be a regulatory framework. But we should have a regulatory framework which does not make the Government overly intrusive into the media world, especially in view of Section 79 of the Constitution. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, there are certain principles that we need to observe in a democratic polity. First and foremost, in the area of freedom, individual and personal; the freedom of peoples and communities, the freedom of thinking and conscience and the freedom of association. Any nation that wants to build a democratic society and polity must be prepared to pay the price for democracy. The price for democracy is what we, in public life, always pay when we want to defend the freedom of expression and information, when we know that, that freedom can be used adversely against us. On many occasions, the freedom of expression and information has been used adversely against me, and very painfully so. I remember in 2003 in February - I cannot quite remember the date but I think it was 11th February, 2003 - when, as a Minister for Planning and National Development, I organised the first stakeholders' meeting in Mombasa to discuss a draft for the Economic Recovery Strategy (ERS), which has been a big success in this country. I had been working flat out for three days without eating properly. I actually left my office in the Ministry of Planning and National Development, at the Treasury, at 10 O'clock to drive straight to the airport and go to Mombasa for that meeting, having not had lunch. I had to eat a sandwich in the aeroplane and when I got to Mombasa, rather than eat a proper meal, I only had some soup and a bottle of beer. That was where my problem started, because I should have had a proper diet after working so hard. So, the next day during the meeting, Mr. Andrew Mulei, who was sitting next me, after realising that I was not myself, advised me to take a glass of cold orange juice, which made matters worse. Having not been a good medical person, I did that and the end result was that when I went to address the audience, I puked rather than speak. I had to be rushed to a dispensary and be given first aid to come back to life and continue with the work that had taken us to Mombasa. Eventually, I read in the \"gutter Press\" that: \"Prof. Anyang'-Nyong'o had been taken suddenly ill in Mombasa. He is suffering from a strange disease\". They even suggested that I was suffering from HIV/AIDS. That was an extremely painful matter to my family, and very many people advised me to take that matter to the court. However, I decided that, that was the price, as a public figure, that I had to pay 2316 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES July 5, 2007 for serving the people of Kenya. I did not feel it was necessary to take the \"gutter Press\" to the courts and assert my rights. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, what we need to do is for the Fourth Estate to rise up to its responsibility of self-regulation and civility. Culture and civilisation are things that cannot be legislated about. They are things that should be learnt and lived up to. The struggle that we must engage in, in this country, is to build a political character of civility and responsibility, beginning, particularly, with the Fourth Estate which must enjoy and exercise the freedom of information and expression. So, being a public figures, sometimes the defence of that freedom can be very painful to us. We are those who have to suffer some of the adverse effects of that freedom. However, it is no licence to use that suffering to make an adverse law that will impinge on democracy. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, so, the next thing that we should learn in paying the price for democracy is the old age liberal principle that says, \"That government is best that governs least\". Our Constitution says that this country is a country of equality, and without any discrimination against sex, race, colour or age. That principle is very important, and must be defended at all costs. The same Constitution gives us the freedom of association and expression. Those are the cardinal principles of building a democratic society. This means that a government which will promote and defend that principle, is a government that is best because it governs least. When I read this Bill, it goes contrary to the principle that \"That government is best that governs least\". It takes the Government right into the newsrooms. The Government should tread very carefully! If I was the Minister for Information and Communications, I would end this Bill at Clause 7. I would establish a regulatory agency and give it the powers to establish its own conduct for its members. I would also charge it with coming up with by-laws and codes of conduct that it will enforce. If it does not, then the Government can visit it with reprimand. However, when the Government takes it upon itself to go into the details of trying to legislate for it what it will do, this, I think is intrusion. I really think it is intrusion. So, to me, the Bill is okay up to Clause 7. After that, it enters into a lot of problems. If you read the Bill carefully after Clause 7, it begins entering into the realm of poor drafting and contradictions. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, as I said, Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, one example that I picked up, which will always be a problem, is on page 754, the Third Schedule called the \"Code of Conduct for the Practice of Journalism, Accuracy and Fairness.\" I will read it for the Minister for Information and Communications, whom I have a great deal of respect for, one, because he was my student and a very good student at that. Secondly, he is my colleague in Parliament, among other things. Thirdly, I campaigned for him to come to this House and I am glad he came. I would like to read the two clauses on page 754 so that---"
}