Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 425107,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/425107/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 291,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. (Prof). Nyikal",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 434,
        "legal_name": "James Nyikal",
        "slug": "james-nyikal"
    },
    "content": "of polygamy in traditional marriages, but I support the need to inform the spouses that one is intending to get into polygamy. Maybe the issue of seeking consent may be a bit too much, but I do not think it is fair that somebody just wakes up in the morning and finds that they are now in a polygamous marriage, even if it was potentially so at the time it was conceived. So, that is important. In reality, people say that traditionally nobody informed their spouses when they were getting married, but I know in our tradition, you were expected to inform your wife and give reasons why you think you should get another spouse. I can see hon. Wanga agreeing with me that this is the truth. So, this recognizes that and agrees with that. I also support this law because it gives equal status to partners in a marriage. For many years, partners have suffered and to large extent, women and now, it is coming to men. Some people, because of their economic or physical might, subdue others in marriage. This Bill recognizes that.The flexibility in this Bill is important because marriages that are conducted outside the country, which are in line with our Constitution and our law, are also automatically recognized in this Bill. It is important that we have clear dispute resolution mechanisms and again, this Bill has put it very clearly. I like the definition of marriage, ease of registration and the clear definition of who celebrates a marriage. However, there are a few areas like nullification of marriage on the ground that it has not been consummated. Clause 73 says that a partner to a marriage may petition the court to annul the marriage on the ground that the marriage has not been consummated since its celebration. Surely, there has to be a time limit to that. You cannot get married today and tomorrow you run to court and say: “Since we celebrated the marriage, we have not consummated it.” We need to look at that. Also, in Clause 66, where it says that a marriage is irrevocably broken down if a spouse has been sentenced to a term of imprisonment for life or for a term of more than seven years. These are issues that should be left to people. There are people who persevere and wait for their spouses even for seven years and there is always opportunity that they may come back. So, that should not be put in law. That can lead to abuse. With that, I support this Bill."
}