HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 300295,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/300295/?format=api",
"text_counter": 430,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. George Nyamweya",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": null,
"content": "Mr. Speaker, Sir, I wish to seek your guidance in respect of your second ruling. Mr. Speaker, Sir, there is something which has disturbed me, if I may say so. I have done a bit of research on it; whether it is really in order for a fundamental issue to be raised by a Member by way of a point of order. My understanding of a point of order is that you are pointing out something which is disorderly within what is going on in that particular debate. But can it really be used as raising a constitutional or substantive matter? Should it really not therefore be - and I am seeking your guidance on this – that if you want to challenge anything really, then you should have a substantive Motion which deals with that subject. Now, I am talking in the sense that the point you are referring to or giving a ruling on, arose from a point of order. Mr. Speaker, Sir, I wish to remind you that, at one time, the Departmental Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs had been seized of the appointment of the Chief Justice, Attorney General, Director of Public Prosecutions and a few other appointments. It was raised in this House as a point of order. Indeed, the report from the Department Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs was, therefore, not even tabled. It was not given to Members to decide whether they want to reject it or approve it. Now, in this case, again, this issue has been raised as a matter of point of order. It is actually, in my respective view, giving the Speaker the role of actually doing the work of the House itself. It may be unfair; it may be proper, but I do not know. But I do not suggest it is. I would have thought it is the cardinal duty of the House itself to deliberate on any form of report from its Committees and, in its own wisdom, reject or approve. Recently, again, the Departmental Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs, in respect of the Ethics and Anti Corruption Commission, submitted a report which the House, in its wisdom, rejected. My understanding of the ruling that you have just given and the previous ruling appear as if they may well be, actually, contradicting each other. It will be useful in future for the House to really know whether it is the function of the Speaker to undertake such duties or, it is the function of the Members themselves to deliberate and agree on what to do with this. Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would kindly wish to get some guidance on that."
}