Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 416412,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/416412/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 335,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Baiya",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 8,
        "legal_name": "Peter Njoroge Baiya",
        "slug": "peter-baiya"
    },
    "content": "an institution and it can actually take issue with decisions it feels are doubtful regarding what the I-G does. But it cannot be expected to be involved in day-to-day operations. More so, when it is not headed by professional policemen, it means that it is essentially a supervisory role with regard to overall responsibility of the I-G. It exercises provisory and developing policies. That means that even if the Constitution speak about transfers, promotions and so on and so forth, the I-G is part and parcel of that NPSC. So, there is a linkage between what he intends to do and the Commission. This should give him the approval and the harmony that is lacking. Otherwise, it is very unfortunate when some Members make contributions indicating that they would wish the country to remain in a scenario where there is instability in the command structure; a situation where even when a transfer is done, a police officer rushes to court challenging the I-G’s power to actually carry out that transfer. Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, to allow that kind of scenario is really very prejudicial to the country to the extent that amendments are seeking to cure that problem. I believe we ought to support them in keeping with the intention of the police reforms that we intend to carry out. There are problems with vetting. This was actually a requirement of the law and also of the police reforms. It came out from the investigations of the commissions that were set up to undertake an overview of the challenges facing the police. That is how this recommendation came up. That it would be imperative to conduct vetting process akin to what the country did with the judges. That kind of vetting is not popular with the officers who are involved. But for us to just come here and dismiss those vetting processes saying that it amounts to victimizing those who may really be found that they are wanting in terms of the review process, I would really view that as pedaling the country’s reform process backwards, which is really not going to help this country move forward in terms of addressing the challenges of security in this country. I would really only want to see that even as the hon. Member who made that contribution is not here, and I do not want to mention his name, but it is important that the country settles the issue of the integrity of serving police officers. They should be vetted. Those who are found wanting in terms of integrity and in terms of adherence to professional ethics of the security docket, should be allowed to allow the country to re-invent the system once more. The terms upon which they are being done is fairly friendly recognizing that the country is not heaping blame on them. It is only that the country is prepared to give a fresh start to the challenges of insecurity in this country. Therefore, this House, having supported both the Constitution and also the statutes that were meant to usher in this reform process, it should also consider these other challenges which are actually feedback arising from the implementation of the initial statutes that we passed. The problem is there and it is quite apparent to everybody. We do have gaps arising from the command structure. We should not allow that. I believe the purpose why the Commission was set up was to confirm to every police officer that the country is committed to ensure that there will be clear professionalism within the Police Force. The promotion system, transfers and disciplinary action will not be decided only by the Inspector-General. There will be an opening where the Commission can actually review those decisions before approving them. But to attempt even in the list to water down the capacity of the Inspector-General ---"
}