Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 344792,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/344792/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 189,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Hon. Members, the Member for Kilome then demanded that if the Speaker were to rule that the document tabled by hon. Kilonzo be expunged, the same would have to apply to the further document tabled by the late Minister. The Speaker declined the demand and informed the Member of Kilome that, that amounted to intimidating or threatening the Chair and required the Member for Kilome to withdraw the remark. The Member obliged, withdrew and apologized. The Speaker did not on this occasion undertake as alleged by the hon. Member to give a ruling on whether or not the document he is aggrieved over should be expunged. I have, in fact, carefully perused all the HANSARD reports on this matter, and do not find that at any point the Speaker made a promise to rule on whether or not the document complained of should be expunged from the records of the House. That notwithstanding, I have found it important to deal substantively with the request of the hon. Member for Kilome because of the weighty questions it raises. The hon. Member argues in his request and in correspondence by a letter to my office that following the precedent set on 20th November, 2012, when the Speaker ordered the allegations of criminal conduct made against the Kenya Defence Forces (KDF) without evidence be expunged from the request for a Ministerial Statement, the document he complains of should similarly be expunged. He also cites the order made by the Speaker on 26th April, 2012 directing, belatedly, that all allegations which had been made by the Member for Bondo, hon. Oburu Odinga, imputing improper motive against hon. K. Kilonzo without a substantive Motion be expunged from the records of the House as they contravened the Standing Orders. Hon. Members, from the chronology of events, two issues arise for determination namely:- (i) Whether false allegations were made against the Member for Kilome in contravention of the Standing Orders. (ii) Whether the Speaker may order the allegations and the documents in which they are contained to be expunged from the records of the House. Standing Order No.79 makes provision on the content of speeches and, in particular, places some restrictions on the same. Under Standing Order No.79(4), it is prohibited for a Member to impute improper motive to any other Member except upon a specific substantive Motion, of which, at least, three days notice has been given calling in question the conduct of that Member. This is important because it avoids the situation where the House becomes the arena for expletives and name calling. It shields the proceedings of the House from being poisoned by personal attacks. In my considered opinion, I do not find that Standing Order No.79, or any other Standing Order, for that"
}