Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 248036,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/248036/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 219,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Munya",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 279,
        "legal_name": "Joseph Konzolo Munyao",
        "slug": "joseph-munyao"
    },
    "content": "Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for giving me this opportunity to contribute to this Motion. I would like to oppose the Motion from the outset. I am opposing it on very solid legal grounds. I am even surprised that this Motion found its way to this House! That is because it is intended to violate the Constitution of this country. Our Constitution names the existing districts! Without amending the Constitution to increase the districts, you cannot validate any other districts. So, what the Mover of the Motion is asking this House to do is to legalise an illegality and violate the Constitution of this land. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, the proper procedure for creating new districts--- As far as I am concerned, the so-called new 28 districts do not exist! They were not created legally! The Constitution has never been amended to recognise them and, therefore, they do not exist as far as the laws of this country are concerned. So, even if we amend the District and Provinces Act 1180 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES May 7, 2006 without amending the Constitution, we will be doing an exercise in futility. The supreme law of this land is the Constitution! It is only the Constitution that can be amended first, before we can amend the other legislation to legalise the existing districts. Therefore, the proper procedure should have been the following:- The hon. Member should have brought a Bill to amend the Constitution. Once it is amended, it allows us to increase the districts. Then, we can amend the Act to create new districts. But he is trying to do it the other way round! That is, therefore, unacceptable!"
}