Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 499650,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/499650/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 198,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "pronounced itself on the manner in which, pursuant to Article 110(3) of the Constitution, the Speakers of the two Houses are to jointly resolve the question as to whether a Bill is a Bill concerning counties and, if it is, whether it is a special or an ordinary Bill; AND WHEREAS despite the Supreme Court’s Advisory Opinion, the National Assembly has failed to adhere to the requirements of Article 110(3) of the Constitution- (a) in respect of forty-six (46) Bills originating in the National Assembly, by publishing and considering the Bills and where such Bills have been passed by the National Assembly, by proceeding to secure presidential assent to the Bills without seeking the concurrence of the Speaker of the Senate in terms of Article 110(3) of the Constitution; and (b) in respect of twenty-one (21) Bills originating in the National Assembly, by proceeding to consider the Bills in circumstances where the concurrence process under Article 110(3) has been initiated but has not been concluded and in disregard of the proposals by the Speaker of the Senate, in accordance with the directions given in the Advisory Opinion of the Supreme Court, for the establishment of a Joint Committee to advise the Speakers on the nature of the Bills, and thereafter, where such Bills have been passed by the National Assembly, by proceeding to secure presidential assent to the Bills; OBSERVING that in the case of twenty-six Bills originating in the Senate, the Speaker of the Senate has sought the concurrence of the Speaker of the National Assembly in terms of Article 110(3) of the Constitution, and the Speaker of the National Assembly has either not responded to the Speaker of the Senate or where there has been a response, has on each occasion stated that the Bills do not concern County Governments even though the Bills manifestly affect the functions and powers of the County Governments in terms of Article 110(1)(a) of the Constitution and of the Advisory Opinion of the Supreme Court; CONCERNED that owing to the unlimited legislative mandate of the National Assembly, the National Assembly may have no incentive to observe or to reasonably engage in the concurrence process under Article 110(3) of the Constitution thus resulting in a legislative process that disregards the Senate and that is virtually unicameral; FURTHER CONCERNED that the continued exclusion of the Senate in the legislative process adversely impacts the Senate’s ability to represent the Counties and to protect the interests of the Counties and their Governments in the legislative process in the national Parliament and that this could eventually result in the weakening and eventual dismantling of the devolved system of government which is the cornerstone of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010; OBSERVING that this situation has continued to persist since the constitution of the two Houses of Parliament after the last General Elections; DESIROUS that there should be a conclusive determination on the manner in which legislation should be processed between the two Houses and on the concurrence process under Article 110(3) of the Constitution, including the procedure to be observed where there is no concurrence between the two Speakers; 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."
}