Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 425103,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/425103/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 287,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Katoo",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 199,
        "legal_name": "Judah Katoo Ole-Metito",
        "slug": "judah-ole-metito"
    },
    "content": "proposed Bill as it stands now provides only for monogamous marriages and also polygamy, under the customary marriage. I want to bring the House to the attention of Clause 42(1) which says: “A marriage under this Part shall be celebrated in accordance with the customs of the communities of one or both of the parties to the intended marriage.” I think this needs to be made clear in the Third Reading because of the issue of the customs of the communities of one or both. Suppose there is no consensus between the parties on which custom to use? Is it the custom of the lady or man? I had actually raised it with the Chairman of the Committee and he saw sense in it because it might bring confusion on that. However, again on the same part, I am happy about Clause 44(d) where Members have been raising concern on the issue of notifying your first wife or wives that you want to bring another wife. If you read the Committee Report, they have recommended deletion of that section. I know they will do it at the right stage."
}