Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 621948,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/621948/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 198,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "been cancelled or nullified all together. Therefore, this is important because it sets a different precedent from what we have had in this country. Most of the times, we have had situations where people do not have recourse, so that they can state exactly what happened or what can be investigated. Clause 2 of this Bill says that the principal Act is amended by inserting the words “to provide for the establishment, powers and function of the National Examinations Appeals Tribunal” immediately after the words “and the conduct of examinations.” This is very clear and well stipulated. Clause 3 introduces terminologies that are not there in the Principal Act. I want to go to the specific aspects of the amendment at Clause 40 (a), especially on the composition of the Tribunal, which has about five people. We have somebody from the Judicial Service Commission and another one from associations. This issue was discussed by other Senators; it seems that the membership is skewed towards one side and it does not give the student ability to have more support. We need to think of other associations that can cause this to happen. When we look at the composition of the tribunal, it has five members but at Clause 40(f) of this amendment, we have a provision that states that a tribunal shall be properly constituted with at least three members. I feel that for a tribunal that is going to discuss something very critical like cancellation of results for a school, it needs to be spread out in terms of diversity. Therefore, when we shall be making amendments, we will want to have the composition of the tribunal to be increased and to have the sitting members increased to five members. This is to enable people to have confidence that a wide breadth of people from different backgrounds have been part and parcel of the process. This will make people feel more confident about the findings of that tribunal and the direction that is given for that tribunal at any one time. The other issue is the nominating bodies and the idea of bringing in the Cabinet Secretary. This is fine because of due process. The Cabinet Secretary should deal with those specific nominees who have come from associations and key stakeholders. This will bring people who are very well-versed about examinations. In making the appointment, we should also ensure the adherence to the two-thirds gender rule. As much as we have this provision in most of the Bills and amendments, but in practice, it is not adhered to. We need to find a provision to make sure that the provisions are implemented. Somebody needs to put emphasis that no more than two-thirds from one gender should something be enacted and not just put on paper. The time for this tribunal is a two four-year term. The second term is to build up on the experience and the time is long enough to have stability in terms of solving cases. They will be paid by the Salaries and Remuneration Commission (SRC). That is in order."
}