Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 513060,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/513060/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 61,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Ethuro",
    "speaker_title": "The Speaker",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 158,
        "legal_name": "Ekwee David Ethuro",
        "slug": "ekwee-ethuro"
    },
    "content": " Hon. Senators, there was a matter of sub judice raised by Sen. Khaniri. It is true that Standing Order No.92 (4) which states:- “A Senator alleging that a matter is sub judice shall provide evidence to show that paragraphs (2) and (3) are applicable.” Paragraph 2 says that a discussion of such matter is likely to prejudice its fair determination. Civil proceedings shall be deemed to be active when arrangements for hearing such as setting down a case for trial have been made until the proceedings are ended by judgement or discontinuance. We have been given a date for judgment, but there is nothing to prove. We have been told that there are civil proceedings, but there is nothing to prove that. Paragraph 5 states:- “Notwithstanding this Standing Order, the Speaker may allow reference to any matter before the Senate or a Committee.” The burden of proof is on the prosecutor. In this case, if the Chair was coming to use that argument, the responsibility would have been on the Chair to comply with the Standing Orders. Failure to do so, the Speaker cannot help the Chair. I want to believe it is in public knowledge, but our Standing Orders seem to be very elaborate. Therefore, I will allow limited debate or interventions on that matter. If there is a matter we feel might interfere with determination of a case, then I will rule otherwise. Given that there is not much the Chair has assisted the House in terms of prosecuting her case, we will allow Sen. Khaniri to seek for further clarifications on that matter."
}