Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 610142,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/610142/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 115,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Speaker",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Article 251(1) says that:- “A member of a commission (other than an ex-officio member) or the holder of an independent office, may be removed from office only for- (a) serious violation of this Constitution or any other law, including a contravention of Chapter Six; (b) gross misconduct, whether in the performance of the member’s or office holder’s function or otherwise; (c) physical or mental incapacity to perform the functions of the office; (d) incompetence; or (e) bankruptcy”. Article 251(2) reads as follows:- “A person desiring the removal of a member of a commission or of a holder of an independent office on any ground specified in Clause (1) may present a petition to the National Assembly setting out the alleged facts constituting that ground. For us, as long as a member alleges violation of any of the five listed grounds, we cannot stifle or sit on Petitions by Kenyans or anybody else for that matter. Our Standing Order 230 provides that once the petition is presented - and even the Constitution - we have to refer it to the relevant Departmental Committee. It is for the Committee to go and investigate whether those allegations in the Petition are valid or whether they disclose any cause of action against the commissioner or holder of independent office as the case may be. So, hon. Wamalwa, we have discharged our responsibility and we are happy. As you said, the Committee has also discharged its responsibility, investigated the matter and found that the Petition discloses no cause of action. When you say that we should not consider petitions, then the proposal could be dangerous because it means that the Office of the Speaker or the Clerk will be the one deciding on what to do. Let the petition be presented, let us look at it and, indeed, let the entire House listen to the allegations and dismiss them. I have sympathies with the fact that some of the allegations made against the people against whom the petitions may be presented could actually cause untold and irreparable damage to the reputations of those persons. Unfortunately, you as Members of Parliament should be the ones to decide whether the matter should be referred to the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission before it is brought here. But that would be an amendment to the Constitution. For now, we have to continue doing what we are doing because it would be unfair for the Office of the Speaker that once an allegation is made on the violation of any of those five grounds which are listed, to start demanding to see what evidence there is. I have not been given that responsibility. Perhaps, I would be able to do it, but with the necessary infrastructure being set up. It would also require the Speaker to become a judge and start taking evidence. We saw it fit to put it in the Constitution that once an allegation of this nature is made, let it be presented to the National Assembly, the relevant Committee of the 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."
}