{"id":43611,"url":"http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/43611/?format=json","text_counter":812,"type":"speech","speaker_name":"Mr. Orengo","speaker_title":"The Minister for Lands","speaker":{"id":129,"legal_name":"Aggrey James Orengo","slug":"james-orengo"},"content":" Mr. Chairman, Sir, I feel that the word “shall” used in that proposed amendment is not quite mandatory because of the way it is; it says “subject to the provisions of this Constitution, this Act or any other relevant law”. This means it creates a basis upon which any officer can transit from the old Commission to the new Commission. There is a threshold on the part of the recruitment agency; if you just say “may” and you do not give a basis upon which a decision can be made or do not make it subject to the provisions in the Constitution or any other law, then it will look like the word “may” does not really subject the Commission to ensuring that nobody is punished for something that is not in the law. It is really about fairness; the way it has been crafted, it says “subject to”. So, it is not automatic and we need some basis for it."}