Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 417607,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/417607/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 189,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Speaker",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Hon. Members, I know that there are quite a number of you who are waiting to speak, but even as you address this matter, a lot of the issues that have been raised touch on what is happening in the other House. I take it that this is an expression of solidarity and that whatever ruling or direction that we take must be in concert with the other House. Therefore, there will be need for the Speaker of the Senate and I to sit with whoever else may be necessary, to come up with some way forward. Some of you have heard expressions to the effect that once a court order is issued, the first thing is to obey it and then you can question it later. That is the point that the Leader of Majority Party raised. This is because it has been argued that failing to obey is therefore failing to adhere to the doctrine or the principle of the rule of law. So, the question to ask is: Should every order from courts be obeyed? If that is so, visualize this scenario. We have already embarked on the Budget making process. A while ago, hon. Mutava Musyimi indicated that they are going to do some public hearing on Monday 24th. So, a member of the public who knows that it is a requirement for public participation runs to some court, “to some court” mark my words, and on the day that hon. Mutava Musyimi is about to present his report as he has indicated on 28th of February, on 27th somebody obtains an order that says that the National Assembly should not discuss that matter because they have not been heard or if they have been heard, they think that the issues they raised have not been incorporated in the report. An order is issued that the National Assembly should not even attempt to sit and discuss until the matter is heard and determined. Is that therefore to say that the sittings of this House and of the Senate will be subject to control by the Judiciary? I am sure the Legislature is very clear that we ran away from the control of the Executive and everybody wants to operate independently, but how is this interdependence going to play out? So, if an order of that nature were to be brought is that to say that therefore, I would say, “Ladies and gentlemen, Members of the National Assembly, I tell you you are not going to sit for the next few days until we are told when we next sit?” These are some of the things that seem to bother me. It is true that we want to respect every arm. Indeed, I think Parliament has over the years respected the other arms but you know there must be a limit. If we are told that certain things are not included in the Budget highlights, are we saying that Parliament should not sit until the matter is heard and determined? These are the so-called conservatory orders which my predecessor, the hon. Kenneth Marende, referred to in that ruling which was referred to by hon. Olago Alouch. Is it a situation in which then only the Judiciary will tell the other arms of the Government what do to, when and how?"
}