Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 410691,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/410691/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 1441,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Kang’ata",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 1826,
        "legal_name": "Irungu Kang'ata",
        "slug": "irungu-kangata"
    },
    "content": "Members, I am kindly pleading with you to reject this schedule. It is not a scientific schedule and you cannot quantify the damage caused to your body. Presently, we have what is called case law. Judges have been applying case law and over the years it has been a very objective way of assessing damages to the body of a person. When you bring this one, you do away with that system. Another reason why I am pleading with you Members to reject this amendment is because the Court of Appeal has discussed this issue for a very long time. The Court of Appeal has set a law, as we speak, that you cannot provide for schedules when it comes to injuries to a person. Kindly note this is not for the interest of lawyers per se. It is for the interest of the larger members of the public. It is our mothers, sisters and our children who suffer injuries. So, therefore, we should not look at it in terms of a lawyer benefiting. In actual sense, in any event, most of the people who go to lawyers seeking these services happen to be the poor of the poorest – those who cannot give a lawyer instruction fees. So, therefore, when you come up with this amendment, it is going to disfavor the poor majority."
}