GET /api/v0.1/hansard/entries/380197/?format=api
HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 380197,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/380197/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 905,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. (Prof.) Anyang-Nyong’o",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 193,
        "legal_name": "Peter Anyang' Nyong'o",
        "slug": "peter-nyongo"
    },
    "content": "Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, Article 253 of the Constitution reads: “Each commission and each independent office— ( a ) is a body corporate with perpetual succession and a seal; and ( b ) is capable of suing and being sued in its corporate name.” This is just now operational. Now, these are the things that had been given to the Commission, which are purely procedural, including what it is going to own property and so on. Then it goes further to the membership of the Commission. The Commission consists of nine members appointed in accordance with the Constitution. The chairperson and members of the Commission other than the ex-officio members shall serve on a fulltime basis. This is where I think the nation is getting it wrong. If you look at the Police Service Act, it gives a lot of operational responsibilities to the Inspector-General of Police. If you look at the Constitution, likewise, the Inspector-General of Police’s hands are full. Then, the Inspector-General of Police and his deputies are ex-officio members of the Commission, as by the Constitution established. Some people are now arguing that the Inspector-General should leave his ex-officio membership and become a fulltime chairman of the Police Service Commision. This is contradictory and cannot really work, unless you change the Constitution. In any case, the mischief that the Tenth Parliament was trying to cure was where the head of the Police, who is now the Inspector-General and not the commander--- One of the functions that he is given, which the Police Service Commission cannot interfere with, is to command the police force. That is quite stated both in the Constitution and the Act. He is the full commander of the police force without interference. But when it comes to appointments, promotions, discipline and so on, he is told: “We can discipline even you. So, you have to be answerable to the Commission.” People are now saying: “No, we want a powerful Inspector-General.” This idea of “powerful” so-and-so is a creature of the one-party system. We cannot really go back to it when it comes to the police force because some of us who lived under the Moi Regime and suffered for it know exactly what this absolute power can mean to you; where the man who takes you to detention is the man who decides when you are being released, whether what you did was wrong or not. They expected you to come and apologize! Mr. Temproary Speaker, I remember when the Immigration Officer, Mr. Mutua, called me to his office when they had taken my passport and held it for ten months, and he went in there, opened the Bible and read to me on how to apologize. I told him “that is all fine, but all I want is my passport!"
}