HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 34931,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/34931/?format=api",
"text_counter": 334,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Olago",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": {
"id": 5,
"legal_name": "John Olago Aluoch",
"slug": "john-aluoch"
},
"content": "The Minister has said that it is an oversight and I hope that when we go to the Committee Stage, we are going to have an amendment that is going to correct that anomaly. The second issue that I want to talk about is the dispute resolution mechanism that is set out in Clauses 36 to 41 in the Bill. This is how it should be, but this Bill restricts the right of an aggrieved party to go to the Registrar and then to the High Court. It says that the decision of the High Court shall be final. The freedom to associate and participate in political parties is one of the fundamental rights under our Bill of Rights. It is enshrined in our Constitution and an Act of Parliament should not restrict that right. In my view, when we go to the Committee Stage, we should have an amendment, so that any party who is aggrieved by a decision of the High Court should go to the Supreme Court to enforce his or her right. If that is done, then the Bill will be in conformity with the Constitution. As it is now, that particular provision offends the constitutional provision that relates to freedom to associate. The other issue I want to talk about is party hoping, particularly by Members of Parliament who belong to one party, but who associate with other parties. They have one foot in one party and say that they belong to other parties. These are politicians who behave like spouses who keep on telling the other: “I am going to leave you because I am fed up with you”. He or she repeats that all the time but when you tell him or her: “You can now go, I am also fed up with you. Go!” He or she asks: “Where do I go to? I am yours. I am stuck with you.” Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, this Bill now criminalises that kind of act, and I am very happy. So, if you party-hop, you commit an offence for which you can be charged, and for which the fine prescribed is Kshs500,000. In default, one will serve two years’ imprisonment, or both. That penalty is very lenient. The persons who are going to be able to party-hop and behave the way we have said they should not are Kenyans who can afford to pay Kshs500,000 fine. There are people who are not afraid of paying a fine of Kshs500,000. So, I would wish that when we come to the Committee Stage, we have an amendment to introduce more stringent penalties for persons who commit this kind of offence. Again, we should impose even stronger penalties on repeat offenders, so that if anybody is prone to repeating this offence, he or she should face the possibility of going to jail without the option of paying a fine. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, lastly, the powers of the Registrar of Political Parties in this Bill are too much and can be abused. If we end up with a rogue Registrar, he or she can ruin the political freedom of Kenyans. The powers of the Registrar, under the Bill, to hear and determine disputes, or even to dissolve political parties should be reduced. There should be a body to which he or she will be responsible. That way, the officer who will be wielding that power will be even more responsive to Kenyans, and the power will not be abused. With those remarks, I support the Bill."
}