Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 499891,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/499891/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 152,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "we, therefore, being told that the Senator for Murang’a County has no right to talk about the resources? Are we being told then that when that matter is passed in the National Assembly, it should not come to the Senate, when I represent the people of Murang’a? Again, I should underline that when I talk about Murang’a, I am talking about the generality of all the counties in this county, because that is the essence of the Bill by Dr. Zani and the Mining Bill. Only yesterday we heard some of us here say that there are lots of minerals that are found in this country and we need to protect and understand what it is exactly we are saying. Mr. Speaker, Sir, on the issue of the Constitution, the Motion that is before us is aimed at us resolving to go to the Supreme Court to seek an advisory opinion, so that we can all of us agree finally on what is going to happen. The Supreme Courts all over the world have been known to help change the constitution. Those of you that are lawyers in this Senate and went through first year and second year law will remember very clearly the case of Brown versus Board of Education of Topeka; the 1954 decision. That decision ended segregation in education and everything else in the United States of America. The Constitution was not amended and they did not go for a referendum. But the Supreme Court took that position at that time to define the law and say what its role is on the application of a simple citizen, Mr. Brown, who wanted to fight segregation in America. He succeeded in a decision that was made in 1954, which was a landmark and continuously has been quoted by everybody who is talking about constitutionalism. The point that I am making here is that the Supreme Court of our land, under Article 163 (3) of the Constitution, has a very major role to play in the deciding how this county and devolution will go forward and how the resources of this country will be shared equitably or otherwise. It is upon them now, once we get to them, to state the law. The law is very obvious, but since the National Assembly does not seem to appreciate this, let the Supreme Court state it once and for all and make that decision, so that we do not have to come back here again. If you take Article 125 of the Constitution, on summoning before the Senate – which Sen. Khalwale is so clear about – it is so clear in black and white. But it has to be stated by the Supreme Court once and for all, let it be stated, so that we do not have to go back and forth in dealing with matters of governance and other matters that affect us as a nation. Mr. Speaker, Sir, I support this Motion wholeheartedly. This is the defining moment. Let us not be involved in insults and name calling. Yesterday, I heard some people saying that we should be dissolved as a Senate. I want to tell them that they do not understand where this country is coming from, where we are and where we want to go and what we want to achieve as this nation. We do not have to engage with them. Let the Supreme Court state it; that the Senate has a very major role to play and it is going to continue existing, so that the dreams of this nation – devolution and all – can be achieved for the greater glory of this nation. I trust that everybody in this Senate today is going to be bipartisan on this issue and we are going to vote together on this Motion, so that, finally, we can state what is right, not for ourselves, but for this nation. 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."
}