Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 249756,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/249756/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 412,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Wako",
    "speaker_title": "The Attorney-General",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 208,
        "legal_name": "Sylvester Wakoli Bifwoli",
        "slug": "wakoli-bifwoli"
    },
    "content": " Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, I oppose and proceed on the basis that we are dealing with Sections 26, 27 and 28 of the Act. These are very important sections of the Act, which give the necessary powers to the KACC to really effectively investigate economic crimes and corruption cases. Section 26 requires the Commission, by notice in writing, not to just require any person, but a person reasonably suspected of corruption or economic crimes, to furnish within reasonable time a statement enumerating the person's property and the time at which it was acquired, and giving information in relation to any property that was acquired at or about the time of the suspected corruption or economic crime. So, Section 26 deals with the suspect himself, being required to furnish information as to his property. Section 27 relates to an associate of a suspected person, who can also be required to do a similar thing. Section 28 now requires, not the suspect or the person associated with the suspect but, any person who may have the records on where property is, and so on, to give that information. So, Sections 26, 27 and 28 go to the very core of investigative powers of the KACC. Without these Sections, the KACC may not be effective in investigating economic crimes and corruption. So, we will really be removing the \"teeth\", as it were, of the KACC if we delete Sections 26, 27 and 28. We are really mutilating its powers. For those reasons, I oppose very strongly this amendment."
}