Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 600177,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/600177/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 577,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Kaluma",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 1565,
        "legal_name": "George Peter Opondo Kaluma",
        "slug": "george-peter-opondo-kaluma"
    },
    "content": "Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman, I have no problem with the provision as amended, if it is to apply to subclause (2)(a) to (f) because those matters concern administration of the High Court. However, subclause (2)(g) gives the CJ rule-making authority that is already given by another Act of Parliament to the Rules Committee and not the CJ. Generally, this does not relate to the administration of the High Court, but to general practice of law. So, I beg my good Chair to propose further amendment to delete paragraph (g). As I have said, in Section 81 of the Civil Procedure Act, rule-making authority over these matters of general practice of law is in the Rules Committee and not the CJ. I have mentioned, for instance, in Order No. 40, contempt of injunctions is already prescribed. So, when you again give the CJ parallel rule-making authority, it becomes confusing for the practice of law."
}