Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 502296,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/502296/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 128,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "find ourselves is as if the Judiciary is more equal than the other two. Since it is not more equal in the Constitution, there are some enemies of the Constitution who are now using the Judiciary to fight devolution. Out of the three functions of the legislature, that is, to make laws, oversight and representation, as far as the Senate is concerned, the oversight is far much more critical than the other two when it comes to protection of devolution. When a judge goes ahead and issues an injunction or an order to stop somebody who is coming to clear something to do with funds for the counties, I do not understand how the Chief Justice, who is the head of that institution cannot intervene. There are two articles which require anybody to be called or for anybody in charge of public funds to be personally liable. The idea that the Judiciary or the judges are independent and can make their own independent decisions, I think that is a fraud. That institution has somebody in charge and anybody in charge of an institution must give guidance. Therefore, the idea that the Chief Justice is not in a position to call the Judiciary to a Kamukunji and tell them that they are overstepping their mandate, I think is superfluous. The Chief Justice should do his job. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, it is very well to hear the Attorney-General Emeritus describe how he used to operate when he was there. He used to send Bills to the President for assent through a procedure that is right. I have been going through this document in our Constitution and I cannot see where that procedure is. Maybe the legal minds here can throw some light. My point is; it is about time we originated a law which requires the Attorney-General to follow certain steps and, therefore, conform to certain things. For example, if we have a law saying that the Attorney-General while forwarding a Bill to the President for assent, he should make sure it follows the Constitution. We should go ahead and cite those steps. Did the Bill go before a meeting of the two Speakers for determination whether it affects counties or not? When the registration is over, did it go to both Houses or not? That law can require the Attorney-General to make sure that those steps which we are lamenting about are followed. In this regard any Bill which will go to the President for assent without having followed that specific law, it would to automatically unconstitutional. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I believe that there are quite a number of issues which we have looked at and I personally think we are a little bit behind in making the law because the Constitution itself is skeleton in nature. Some of the specific provisions which we may want, we should take it upon ourselves through the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights so that some of these provisions are made specific on what we want to see. With those few remarks, I beg to support."
}