HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 221241,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/221241/?format=api",
"text_counter": 192,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Muite",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": {
"id": 235,
"legal_name": "Paul Kibugi Muite",
"slug": "paul-muite"
},
"content": "This is an important matter, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir. When you look at the Act of Parliament which we passed, as the National Assembly of Kenya, in 2000, you will find that, that is the Act of Parliament that ratified the Treaty for the East African Community. Section 1 of that Act says:- \"This Act may be cited as the Treaty for the establishment of the East African Community Act, 2000.\" The definition of the Treaty under Section 2 of the Act, at page 225, says:- \"The Treaty means the Treaty for the establishment of the East African Community, entered into by the governments of Tanzania, Uganda and Kenya.\" Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I submit that there is no shadow of doubt, whatsoever, that the original Treaty was ratified by this Parliament. Because the Treaty itself requires any amendments to be ratified, it must follow that the ratification can only be undertaken by the body, organ and institution which ratified the original Treaty, which is, the National Assembly of the Republic of Kenya. Therefore, I urge that the Attorney-General and the Government of Republic of Kenya table before this House, the proposed amendments to the Treaty, so that hon. Members can have the opportunity to ratify them, with or without further amendments. We are binding the State of the Republic of Kenya, which is represented in this House by the elected hon. Members of Parliament, who are elected by the people of Kenya. So, it is only this House that can have the legal mandate to bind the State of Kenya, and not any other organ. Tanzania tabled the amendments which were proposed by Kenya before their National Assembly for ratification. How is it, therefore, that Kenya is shy to bring to this House the proposed amendments, so that hon. Members, as the representatives of the people, can make a decision as to whether those proposed amendments are in the interest of the Republic of Kenya or not? If they are not in the interest of the Republic of Kenya, we will not ratify them. Maybe this is why the Attorney-General or Government is a little shy to bring those amendments. We know what those amendments are seeking to do. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, when Kenya entered into this Treaty for the East African Co- operation--- When Kenya proposed and had two judges appointed to the East African Court, she knew about their conduct, character and experience. If for four years, we, as a country and Government, did not raise any question marks about the character or conduct of those judges--- For four years, we were happy to allow those judges to continue discharging the duties of their offices, as judges of the East African Court. How is it, then, that the day after a ruling, which may have been unpalatable to the Government, is given, we rush to seek amendments to that Treaty in order to make it possible for those judges to be removed? Is that what we should do? Should we, as a House, ratify amendments whose objective is narrow and partisan; to remove judges who have given a ruling that the Government does not like? This country is a leader, not just in the region, but also in the continent and the whole world. Kenya is looked upon to provide leadership. But, Kenya is not providing that leadership! On the contrary, we are setting a very bad example, by trying to undermine the independence, authority and integrity of a court that we have established. If you are unhappy with the ruling of the court, then the other way of showing your displeasure is not by trying to unilaterally amend the Treaty in order to remove the judges. We are becoming an embarrassment as a State. Kenya is becoming an embarrassment to the Community! I ask that those proposed amendments be brought here. Let no one attempt to do a shortcut to the ratification of the amendment. We live in Kenya and we are aware that there is a school of thought in the Government; not in the entire Government, but a few individuals within the Government, who think that the Cabinet alone can ratify amendments to the Treaty. How is it that the Cabinet did not ratify the original Treaty? Why was the original Treaty brought to this House for ratification? May 16, 2007 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 1357 If the original Treaty was not ratified by the Cabinet alone, it must follow by force of reason that the amendment cannot be ratified by the Cabinet alone. Those purporting to suggest that the Cabinet ratified this amendment and to pretend that those are proper amendments to be deposited with the Secretary-General are inviting another court case which is going to be decided against us as a country! Do we want to continue subjecting ourselves to this embarrassment? If the Government wants to make these amendments, let them be laid on the Table of this House and let them convince us with reason! Let them lobby so that those amendments can be ratified. If they fail to get ratification on the Floor of this House, so be it, because, indeed, those proposed amendments are not in the interest of Kenya! Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I urge that there is a serious re-seeking by the Government; we have already suffered the embarrassment of the debacle of trying to change appointee members to the East African Legislative Assembly (EALA). That is an embarrassment! Why do we want, so soon thereafter, to invite another embarrassment by trying to amend a Treaty unconstitutionally and illegally, and inviting a possible suit, which I can guarantee you as a senior counsel; I am not even charging for this free advice that, that case will be decided against us!"
}