HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 579992,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/579992/?format=api",
"text_counter": 123,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Hon. (Ms.) Odhiambo-Mabona",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": {
"id": 376,
"legal_name": "Millie Grace Akoth Odhiambo Mabona",
"slug": "millie-odhiambo-mabona"
},
"content": "Thank you, Hon. Deputy Speaker for giving me this opportunity. I can see my good friend and neighbour, Hon. Mbadi, is wondering why I am given preference, but the Bible says:- “The Kingdom of God suffers violence and the violent ones take it by force”. So, when you have a Speaker who is very conscious about issues of gender, then we must be given priority. I support this Bill, of course, with amendments. I will personally be moving amendments in relation to what Hon. Jakoyo has said in relation to Clause 27. There may be one or two other amendments that I will be proposing. This Bill is coming at the right time especially when we are in the process of passing the proposal by Hon. Kaluma. If you look at the law; that is the Constitution and the existing law, you will find we should not have had Hon. Kaluma’s amendment. We have a Judiciary, unfortunately, because of the push and pull between it and the Legislature, sometimes it does not abide by the law. Otherwise, the Constitution provides very clearly for shielding of Parliament and Members of Parliament on matters that they discuss or do while in Parliament. Hon. Kaluma’s amendment seeks to expand that provision. The saving grace is that it gives provisions for a matter that is done in good faith. It still gives some discretion to the Judiciary in that when you have a matter that is done in good faith, then it is still okay. This is not unique to Members of Parliament. As public officers, especially the ones that protect the interests and rights of Kenyans, we must be shielded in our work so that we are not fearful when we are conducting our work. If we strictly follow the technicalities of law and the strict rules of evidence, then the work of this Parliament would not be done. There are times when, what we call prima facie evidence or information is allowable in Parliament, but is not necessarily allowable in court. To me, as long as there is good faith by MPs in conducting their business, then it is okay. I want to indicate, though, that we must be careful that, even as we shield MPs, there are certain things that cannot be protected, especially acts that are criminal in nature. These cannot be the subject of privilege. The events that happened on 18th of December, last year were an embarrassment to this country and Parliament. I wrote a letter to the Office of the Speaker. As a person who has worked for years in the women and gender sector, including being the Chairperson of the Coalition on Violence Against Women (COVAW), I was disappointed by the non-action by the Speaker when I reported a case of gender violence against me. I know many people were shocked that I was able to raise that issue. Because I have done this work for years, I understand the will of power, relations and violence against women. One of the tools that is used is silence - that when you are violated you stay silent. I will not be silent. If my rights are violated, if any woman’s rights are violated to whatever extent or even if I had been raped, I would have spoken. Violence against women must stop. As we speak on issues of privilege, we cannot protect privilege or purport to protect privilege that violates the rights of other people. The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor."
}