Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 402564,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/402564/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 194,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Wandayi",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 2960,
        "legal_name": "James Opiyo Wandayi",
        "slug": "james-opiyo-wandayi"
    },
    "content": "Thank you, hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, for giving me this opportunity to contribute to this very important Bill. It is important to note that this Bill is intended to give effect to Article 34 of the Constitution. The matter of the freedom of the media is so important that when debating this Bill, we need to take stock of where we have come from as a country. If you look at Article 34(5), this Parliament is expected to enact a legislation that will provide for the establishment of a body that will be independent of control by the Government. Those are the operating words; a body that will be independent of control by the Government, political interests and commercial interests. The Bill as it is, is fairly okay. If you look at the membership of the Media Council as proposed in the Bill, it is drawn from a wide cross section of interest groups. You find KUJ, MOA, the Editors Guild, the LSK and so on. In fact, the membership of this Council is drawn largely from the media fraternity and that is how it is supposed to be. In the developed world, the media does self regulation. The media is better left to self regulate. That is why I want to support this Bill. Again, as you are aware, the devil is in the detail. If you look at the composition of the Media Council as proposed in the Bill, it is quite okay, but when people are nominated by the bodies that nominate them, they sometimes tend to start serving their own interests. That is a problem in this country. When you go further in the Bill, you find that the Cabinet Secretary has been conferred tremendous powers when it comes to the issue of removing a member or any member of the Media Council on whatever grounds as set out in the Bill. The Cabinet Secretary has been given powers to appoint a tribunal. If you allow me, the Cabinet Secretary has been given exclusive mandate to appoint a tribunal comprising of a chairperson who qualifies to be a High Court Judge and two other persons. These are a man and a woman who are competent to assess and terminate the petition that has been drawn by a member of the public against a particular member of the Media Council. My fear is that if on the one hand, you say that the Media Council should remain independent and in fact the members are nominated by independent bodies, and on the other hand, you give the Cabinet Secretary the power to exclusively determine who sits on the tribunal; a tribunal that has been given powers to recommend the sacking or the removal of a member of the Council, then you can see what I am talking about. Automatically, you are trying to say how the members of the Council will continually behave, knowing full well that a petition can be instigated or orchestrated. As we know, it is possible in this country that whenever it is orchestrated or instigated, the Cabinet Secretary can easily appoint a tribunal that comprises of people who can be controlled by the appointing authority and who can do his or her bidding. Therefore, I would want to suggest that for this Bill to give proper effect to the meaning of Article 34 of the Constitution, safeguard the freedom of the media and protect The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor."
}