Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 590987,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/590987/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 53,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. H.K. Njuguna",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 1508,
        "legal_name": "Humphrey Kimani Njuguna",
        "slug": "humphrey-kimani-njuguna"
    },
    "content": "look at the current justice structure in this country, you will realise that it is very technical and bureaucratic. Personally, when I decided to do law, I wanted to find out what was so special with the legal profession. I found out that all of us might perhaps be lawyers, but the procedures of approaching the court is what makes the legal profession technical and out of reach. The fact that anybody can now approach this court and present their case without going through the formalities and technicalities of the court is justice made easy for me. Secondly, the issue of having a lawyer has been done away with. I have listened to some of my colleagues saying that perhaps the issue of having a lawyer needs to be appreciated and be included in this Bill. I am of a contrary view because we need to find out the mischief that this Bill is trying to cure – which is to make justice accessible to everybody. If we go on saying that lawyers must be there we might go the alternative dispute resolution way. When the alternative dispute resolution was being implemented early in the century, the idea was to move away from the technicalities and formalities of the court. Right now, if you go the alternative dispute resolution way, it will perhaps be even more complicated than the court structures themselves. The structure of the Bill, in doing away with lawyers, will perhaps help our old mothers, grandmothers and grandfathers to approach the court and prosecute their cases without unnecessary legal jargon. There are those of us who are criticising the fact that five years’ experience for lawyers and advocates is required for the position of adjudicator. Taking into account that cases are supposed to be determined as fast as possible – perhaps even using local languages – and the presence of claimants who may not be conversant with the court, you need experienced advocates to prosecute these cases in the shortest time possible This is taking into account that justice must be delivered. In terms of experience, I have no quarrel with the five-year experience proposal. The adjudicator must be very experienced persons with the local scenario, including knowledge of local languages and other issues. Therefore, five years’ experience is okay. The other thing that I appreciate about this Bill is the fact that we must accept and appreciate the fact that because of the hitherto justice system that is very expensive and time- consuming, when most Kenyans were faced with a case, most of them chose to hire gangs and use unorthodox means to get justice Therefore, one might decide to hire a gang to retaliate. The current justice system encourages corruption. If you know you cannot access the justice system and somebody owes you money, going to the chiefs, village elders or the police station was encouraging corruption. If we go the Small Claims Courts way, we will reduce crimes and corruption and in a way demystify the current courts structure, which is very intimidating. With those remarks, I support the Bill."
}