Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 27386,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/27386/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 222,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Imanyara",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 22,
        "legal_name": "Gitobu Imanyara",
        "slug": "gitobu-imanyara"
    },
    "content": "Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, for giving me this opportunity also to rise in support of this Bill. I do notice that it is a successor commission to the Public Complaints Standing Committee that had been established through the Gazette Notice No.5826 of 29th June, 2007. You will recall that I did seek a Ministerial Statement in this House regarding an advertisement that had been placed by that Complaints Commission in the media seeking to fill certain vacancies whose holders’ terms were coming to an end. I pointed out that it was a waste of public funds to proceed that way when we were anticipating that we would be passing this law that we are creating under this Commission. Despite my concerns at the time, the Minister proceeded to act under the Public Complaints Committee to appoint these officers who will now apply afresh if they do wish to serve under this commission. I do hope that it will not be necessary again in future to expend public funds in circumstances such as this where we anticipate that the law will change in three months but still proceed to spend millions of shillings of taxpayers’ money for purposes in futility. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, having said that, I wish to point out that under Clause 29(3) of this proposed Bill regarding the jurisdictions to investigate says:- “If the matter referred to under subsection (2) cannot be resolved by conciliation, mediation or negotiation and the Commission determines that the administrative action was carried out unjustly or unreasonably, the Commission shall make such recommendations as it deems fit.” I think this is very big and I hope that when the matter goes to the committee they will look at it so that we do not leave the recommendations completely vague. We should set out what recommendations the commission may actually make as a result of investigations. Otherwise they purport to be carrying out an investigation and then take actions that do not, in fact, reflect the seriousness of the complaint that is made. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, if you look at Clause 30(c), you will notice that the commission shall not investigate a criminal offence. Most of the complaints regarding these administrative actions also amount to criminal offences. When you clearly take away the jurisdiction to investigate a criminal offence, what are you leaving for the commission to investigate? We need to clarify this so that it is made clear that it is only where there are pending criminal proceedings or where there are pending investigations by one of the investigating agencies--- This can be found from the complainant to the commission who can be asked a simple question as to whether they have referred this matter to the police for investigation or to any other investigative body. However, when you say that it shall not investigate a criminal offence, you are diluting all its powers because most of these complaints amount to criminal offences. In any case, I notice that one of the recommendations under Clause 41 states:- “The Commission may, upon inquiry into a complaint under this Act take any of the following steps-"
}