Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 414002,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/414002/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 965,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "by inserting the following new sub-clauses immediately after the re- numbered sub-clause (1) – (2) Any officer of the Service who commits an offence under this Act or is an accessory to the commission of an offence under this Act shall be liable upon conviction to a fine or imprisonment or both depending on the offence committed” (3) Any person who has reason to believe that the provisions of this Act have been, are being, or are about to be violated, may petition the High Court for— (a) a declaration that the provisions of this Act are being, have been, are about to be contravened; (b) an injunction restraining any specified person from carrying out the contravention; (c) the writ of mandamus against an officer or a person who has failed to perform a duty imposed by or under this Act; or any remedy at law or equity for preventing or enforcing the provisions of this Act. In part (a), it is renumbering the existing provision in subclause 1. In (b), it is important in that our Committee felt that there should be harsher penalties for officers of the Service who commit an offence under this Act. In the end, we reached a compromise and agreed that these officers, when they commit an offence, they should be liable upon conviction to a fine or imprisonment or both depending on the offence committed. A new subclause (c), we thought was very important. Some of the stakeholders informed us that there are cases where officers of the Service are involved in poaching. So, we 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."
}