HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 287106,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/287106/?format=api",
"text_counter": 362,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Mbadi",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": {
"id": 110,
"legal_name": "John Mbadi Ng'ong'o",
"slug": "john-mbadi"
},
"content": "Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, first of all, I want to address myself to whether, if a Motion has already been moved in the House, that Motion cannot be ruled as an unconstitutional. There is precedent. I remember when the Justice and Legal Affairs Committee brought a report to this House on the nominations of the Chief Justice, Deputy Chief Justice, the Director of Prosecutions (DPP) and the Attorney-General, this House could not proceed to process those names because matters of constitutionality were raised. So, what Mr. Namwamba has raised with regard to the constitutionality of the Motion is valid and it is not a matter that we are handling for the first time. I also wanted to address myself to the fact that we are not against the fact that the Committee probably found some nominees unsuitable. But what we are saying is that the report in itself is unconstitutional. I want to just touch on two issues. The first one is with regard to the recommendations. On the second recommendation by the Committee, the Committee is trying to imagine that the law that we passed in this House did say that it is the Chair who is supposed to be a lawyer. I want to disagree with that and just take ourselves to the National Police Service Commission Act. It says under Section 5 that the person for the chair should have qualifications stated and there is no legal requirement. But one of the commissioners must be a lawyer. So, out of the six, one should be a lawyer and it does not have to be the chair. So, when the Committee puts it in their report by recommending that the Chair must just be picked from among the lawyers, I think that is being unfair to other qualified Kenyans because it is based on wrong interpretation of the law. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, if you look at the second recommendation on page 22 of this Report, you will realise that it says:- “His Excellency the President may consider nominating the chairperson of the National Police Service Commission who should have a sound legal background given that the mandate of the Commission has quasi-judicial functions, from one of the three persons named hereunder who have been duly interviewed by the Committee and who meet the requirements of Chapter 6 of the Constitution.” This is creating a law; when we created the National Police Service Commission Act, if we wanted the Chair to be a lawyer we should have said so in the law. What we did say, as a House, is that one of the Commissioners should be a lawyer. If the Committee was rejecting the names on the basis that none of them was a lawyer that would be perfect. Reject all the names and ask the President to appoint six Commissioners, one of whom must be a lawyer. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the beauty of this Constitution is that it separates powers of the Executive from that of the Legislature. Ours is to vet nominees. We cannot reverse the roles the way the Committee is purporting to do by trying to nominate for the President to vet and bring back to Parliament. We are not saying that the Report should be thrown out, but the Report as it is should be withdrawn, refined to be in line with the Constitution and the statute that provides for the National Police Service Commission, so that we can debate a report which, if we take a vote on, we would not be violating the Constitution. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I want to conclude by saying it would be wrong for us, as a House, to debate a Report that has provisions which violate the law. What if we take a vote and the vote is carried with the provisions against the law? Therefore, I would urge our colleagues who are resisting to see the sense that what we are questioning is not what the Committee is saying. Probably we are in agreement; we are asking them to do it in a way that will not violate the Constitution and the National Police Service Act. Thank you."
}