Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 580008,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/580008/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 139,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Ng’ongo",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 110,
        "legal_name": "John Mbadi Ng'ong'o",
        "slug": "john-mbadi"
    },
    "content": "Thank you, Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker for giving me this opportunity to contribute to the Parliamentary Powers and Privileges Bill which is repealing the National Assembly Powers and Privileges Act. I will not repeat what my colleagues have said with regard to the good provisions in this Bill. I agree that freedom of speech and debate is cardinal for our functions. Without that, this Parliament will not be able to execute its functions effectively. I am happy that through Hon. Keynan, the PSC has decided to put a clear definition of what precincts of Parliament mean. This will cushion Members of Parliament because we not only transact our business in the Chamber but also outside which includes our offices and even in the Media Centre. Having said that, I think there are various clauses in this Bill that require refining as we do the right thing to give this House power to cushion it. I want to say that I wish we shelved the Constitutional Amendment Bill by Hon. Kaluma which I opposed in preference to this Bill. I do not believe that we can provide immunity to this House by amending the Constitution. What we would have done is to strengthen this Bill so that this House is protected from unnecessary interference through legislation. But, there are certain provisions in this Bill which I feel need to be looked at very carefully. First, I see an attempt to give the Speaker too much power. I am afraid that we are giving the Speaker too much power. Before I come to that, Clause 5 needs clarity. We need to clarify how much we want to limit access to Parliament. If you look at Article 117 of the Constitution, it allows members of the public access to Parliament because this is a public institution. I know there are threats to this Parliament. Therefore, you need to restrict access in a way that protects the Members of Parliament and staff. But while doing that, you need to be very clear, through legislation, what limitation of access to Parliament would mean. If we leave it generally, it can easily be abused by the Speaker by denying people who, rightly, should access Parliament that very access. Clause 8 provides that the Speaker may designate areas within and outside the precincts of Parliament where members of the public may, pursuant to Article 37 of the Constitution, assemble, demonstrate, picket or present memoranda to Parliament. This is constitutionally guaranteed that members of the public can picket, demonstrate and assemble in Parliament and precincts of Parliament. This Clause is bringing order that we need to designate an area for those members of public to do that. Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, it goes ahead to provide that any assembling, demonstrating, picketing and presentation of memoranda to Parliament under that sub- section shall be in accordance with such guideline as the Speaker may issue. I have a problem with that. Why are we placing the responsibility of coming up with guidelines to regulate such an important function and a constitutionally guaranteed benefit to the public to one person, that is the person of the Speaker? I read it together with Clause 41 which, again, gives the speaker powers to--- It says that the Speaker of the National Assembly may from time to time issue such orders as may be necessary or expedient. The relevant Speaker may, from time to time, as may be expedient, issue a 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."
}