HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 577573,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/577573/?format=api",
"text_counter": 23,
"type": "other",
"speaker_name": "",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": null,
"content": "Hon. Members, you will agree with me that it would be imprudent for the Speaker, or, indeed, this House to assume that the exclusion of the above limits from the current Constitution is interpreted as allowing room for amendment to a Bill proposing to amend it. The customs and traditions of our democracy have been to restrict amendment Bills seeking to amend the Constitution. I see no reason to depart from this practice, as the Speaker cannot rely on allegory or allusion in guiding the House. Hon. Members, you will note that the preamble to our Constitution highlights that, the people of Kenya adopted, enacted and gave themselves and, future generations of this Republic, the Constitution. The sanctity of the Constitution as a social contract between the people of Kenya, and not a document belonging to the Houses of Parliament, nor any other organ for that matter, is to be jealously safeguarded at every turn. And any process of its amendment is delicate and can only be undertaken with reference to a definite procedure that deviates from the ordinary. Hon. Members, while Parliament has been given the power to amend the Constitution, we should be mindful that the Constitution belongs to the people of this Republic. Treating the process of its amendment as akin to an ordinary legislation would subvert the collective will of the people. In this regard, it is expected that any person intending to amend the Constitution, must be very clear and precise on what he or she is intending to alter, but not to change mind while in the process. It is my strong view that, any proposal to amend the Constitution should be preceded by the meaningful and adequate consultation before such a Bill is published, a principle embodied in Article 256(2) of the Constitution. Bearing in mind that the legislative power is originally derived and consequently vested in the people, we ought to obtain the confidence of our fellow citizens even as we endeavor to amend the Constitution. The process of making or amending the Constitution, therefore, cannot be without consultations, precision and guarded restraint. Indeed, James Madison, the fourth President of the United States of America, 1809-1817, is considered the Father of the American Constitution. He once wrote, and I quote:- “The American Constitution was not, like fabled goddess of wisdom, the offspring of single brain. It ought to be regarded as the work of many heads and many hands”. Hon. Members, one of the fundamental questions that would arise if the Speaker was to allow amendments to a Bill proposing to amend the Constitution is whether such a Bill would be subjected to mediation processes in terms of Article 113 of the Constitution, as read with Standing Order No.149. A close reading of Article 256(1)(d) of the Constitution reveals unequivocally that a Bill to amend the Constitution would not, as I earlier stated, be subjected to mediation, as it is a process prescribed for ordinary legislation. Articles 111 and 112 of the Constitution, further extrapolate this by providing that only special and ordinary Bills may be subjected to mediation processes. A Bill to amend the Constitution is clearly not one of the Bills under Articles 111 or 112 of the Constitution, which invites the application of mediation processes. Further, as I earlier stated, the Constitution is a document belonging to the people of Kenya, and not to the Houses of Parliament."
}