Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 493061,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/493061/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 58,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "discretion to the President to address Parliament annually or at any other time when he thinks there is a matter the representatives of the people need to know. The Address by the President, traditionally, is intended to create the nexus between the President as Head of State and the people who have placed him in that position. The only way you can address the people of Kenya in one meeting is by addressing the people who have been elected to represent the people of Kenya. So, it should not be seen as if the Presidential Address is a little matter; it is an important matter and it complies with the dictates of our constitutional order which requires that the Executive must at all times remain subservient to the will of the people because all sovereign power is vested in the people of Kenya. So, Article 132 of the Constitution is placed in that context to allow interaction between the Executive and the people of Kenya through their representatives. It is no wonder therefore that when the President addressed the joint sitting of Parliament on 6th October, 2014, his opening remarks recognized that he is addressing Parliament as representatives of the people. That is in paragraph 2 of his Speech and he said:- “In this respect, I am here to address you as representatives of the people on an important national matter regarding our sovereignty” The crux of the Address of the President to Parliament revolved around his appearance in the International Criminal Court (ICC) which is not a small matter. This is not a matter that Kenyans can just read in the newspapers about. I say so because in the history of the world, since the establishment of Nation of States, no Head of State has ever been required by national or international law to appear before a court of law. So, this was something quite historic and, therefore, the President owes the people who have elected him and the people who have placed him in office an explanation; why he is going, under what circumstances and the legal context in which he was making an appearance before the ICC. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, a lot has been said about the ICC and I want to go on record and say that, initially, when the ICC was being established, I am one of the scholars who wrote extensively in support of the need for an international judicial mechanism to make sure that all persons, irrespective of their official capacity, do not abuse office and do not misuse the power they hold to traumatize, brutalize, kill and maim people. It is in this context that it is not surprising today that the International Criminal Court Statute does provide therefore, that the official position of an accused person as Head of State or Head of Government is irrelevant. That is Article 25 read together with Article 27 of the Rome Statute. In fact, it goes on for the avoidance of doubt to clarify in Article 6 that criminal responsibility before the court is individual; it is not collective or official. Once somebody is charged, he or she is charged as an individual and not by virtue of the office they occupy. The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposes only. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor, Senate."
}