Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 516403,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/516403/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 327,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Chepkong’a",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 1154,
        "legal_name": "Samuel Kiprono Chepkonga",
        "slug": "samuel-kiprono-chepkonga"
    },
    "content": "Thank you, hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman. I note what the Members are saying. I am a lawyer and I am also getting exceedingly frustrated. This is because when Departmental Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs considered this Bill, it was looking at it contradistinction with other Bills. The Sexual Offences Act is there. So, what we are seeking to do is not to reproduce what is already contained in other Bills. We do not want to re-define what “family member” is as defined in the Marriage Act. We might end up having two different legislations which have different definitions of what a family member is. What we just merely did is to import the definition of “family member” under the Marriage Act. So, you know you cannot have two--- Even the courts themselves, if they will have to interpret, they will be in a confused state because one legislation will be saying this and the other one something else. Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman, let me clarify this issue. When you talk about a family member as defined in the Marriage Act, it refers to a spouse and children of that particular marriage. It does not refer to an estranged spouse or a spouse who has already been divorced. Someone who has already been divorced has ceased to be part of your family. So, you cannot say that so-and-so who has been divorced is still part of my family. He or she cannot be!"
}