Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 287087,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/287087/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 343,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Namwamba",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 108,
        "legal_name": "Ababu Tawfiq Pius Namwamba",
        "slug": "ababu-namwamba"
    },
    "content": "Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Chair went on to say:- “The Speaker as the leader of the House and the manifestation of the authority of the House is mandated and obligated to safeguard, and jealously, its sovereignty within Government to determine what it shall and shall not do and when and in what manner it shall do those things without interference from any other person or authority. Hon. Members, this position is recognized in parliamentary practice and traditions and in both the former and the present Constitution.” This is what the Constitution means when it vests the legislative authority of the Republic in Parliament and provides that Parliament manifests the diversity of the nation, represents the will of the people and exercises their sovereignty. This is also the essence of the separation of powers that I have every so often pronounced myself upon from this position. The view that it can fall to another organ, whether the Executive or the Judiciary, to determine for Parliament a matter before Parliament is, to my mind, constitutional heresy; which I would urge that every person in this country and more so, in this House, completely purges and disabuses themselves of. This disposes also of the question of whether or not the Speaker can properly interpret the Constitution or that this function belongs to the Judiciary. The answer, of course, is that in so far as a constitutional question arises before the House, within the conduct of the business of the House, it is the constitutional duty of the Speaker to interpret the Constitution to that extent and for that purpose alone, so as to enable the House to proceed with its constitutional functions. I emphasize the following, hon. Members. It is not fathomable and it would be a grave negation of the Constitution that the House should adjourn or otherwise suspend its business and seek the directions of another body or organ before it can proceed. I want all of us to note that emphasis. I think that it is time to debunk and demystify, for all time, the question of the interpretation of the Constitution.” Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in that ruling, we have landmark precedence where the Chair has confirmed that indeed the Chair bears the authority to address itself to the questions of legality and constitutionality. Therefore, I believe that I am properly within the jurisdiction of the Chair to seek the guidance of the Chair on this matter. Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir."
}