Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 362566,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/362566/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 374,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. (Prof.) Nyikal",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 434,
        "legal_name": "James Nyikal",
        "slug": "james-nyikal"
    },
    "content": "This is the second time we are seeing this. When we were conducting a vetting exercise last time, we also had a lady on whom we had an argument; we read exactly how the Committee has presented the facts; they clearly lead to where they intended to go. When you reach the decision of the Committee, it is inconsistent with the facts. Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, what we are seeing here--- Look at this and at the last page; there are four issues that you find the Committee is not satisfied with; the nominee holds an opinion inconsistent with Article 167 of the Constitution. A judge of the Supreme Court, Deputy Chief Justice, really must be consistent with the Constitution in most issues, or in a major issue like this one. So, once you read that, it strikes you; surely something is not right here. Then the next one is that the nominee does not demonstrate a clear view of human rights, and was not clear was not clear in her legal philosophy. At a certain point in every profession, whether technical or whatever profession, your philosophy in life in guiding the profession, particularly if you are at a high level, is of utmost important. It is even more important than the letter of the law. I think some hon. Member, a lawyer, and I am not a lawyer, said that is what they call jurisprudence. If you have somebody who is not clear on their legal philosophy I think that is a major weakness; that came from the Committee itself. Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, then the Committee says that there is an issue of succession. I think here I wish to differ with some of our colleagues. It is not a matter of discrimination because of somebody’s age. What we are doing in this House is actually planning for the future of this country; looking at every factor that may bring us problems or good governance. If you have a succession problem, that is something that you have to address at this point. I think the issue here is not that somebody is old and so"
}