Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 344204,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/344204/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 401,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "S.13(3) Delete the expression “forty-five” and substitute therefor the expression “thirty”. S.28 Delete the expression “two months” and substitute therefor the expression “forty-five days”. The amendment is set out extensively on page 5984 and on to the following page 5985.First, I wish the Members to note that the provisions relating to the management in the Elections Court of the election disputes has been given to us by the Judiciary. The Hon. Chief Justice set up a task-force that studied the timelines within the Constitution and the law, which proposed that Parliament should amend The Elections Act first to allow the Magistrates Court to hear some of the disputes especially those relating to county assemblies. Currently, our Magistrates Courts are manned by fairly senior and experienced judicial officers and there was a feeling that if we did not empower them, we would clog up the rest of the court system. Section 6(2) relates to the compilation of the register. We wanted to reduce the time for the compilation of the register by deleting 90 days and inserting 60 days and deleting 30 days and inserting 14 days. We want to give more time for the register to be compiled. All of us are aware of why we must be as cautious as possible with the register, so that the integrity of the register is not compromised by timelines that are not necessary. We want to harmonize Sections 6(2) and 6(3). That is why we are also reducing 30 days to 14 days in Section 6(3). In Section 3(8), we are trying to provide for the holding of elections without itemizing presidential and governor elections. We are just saying holding of elections in the language of Section 3(8), so that the Statute reads in the same manner. Again, in respect of Section 75(1), you will notice that we are trying to clarify that it is the petition concerning the election of county governor which will be heard by the High Court. For the same reason, we want to make a clear distinction between what the Resident Magistrate’s Court can hear and what the High Court can hear. Again, we have made that clarification in Section 3(8). In Section 96, we are trying to harmonize the rules that apply to referendum and the rules that apply to elections. Again, this was on the recommendation of the Judiciary. Finally, there were two proposed amendments and I want to drop one set of the amendment, which relates to Section 13. I do not know whether the Members are looking at Section 13. There was a proposal to delete 45 days and substitute that with 30 days. This being the nomination period, we were trying to reduce it from 45 days to 30 days. We have received very serious protestations from the IEBC saying that if we do that, they may not have the time that they may require to ensure that they receive nominations and that any disputes arising out of the nominations are resolved in good time. My own advice to Parliament, because nothing is lost here, I should drop those two amendments and let the status quo as obtains now relating to the nomination period remain in place. The IEBC has said that it would create logistical challenges especially as regards the resolutions of disputes arising from nominations. So, I propose to drop the amendments that I had proposed to Sections 13(1) and 13(3), I believe."
}