Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 622005,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/622005/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 255,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "The first critical limb is the composition of the tribunal. If we do not get the composition right, we will miss division of this Bill. Secondly is the cost of appealing. If we make it too expensive, then we might not as well have put it there. Who are the people who appeal? It is the aggrieved parents and students, most of whom you will find that they have outstanding school fees balances which in the first place, they are unable to settle. So, if you put provisions that it should come at a high cost, it means that it will be inaccessible.The last limb is the timeframe within which the dispute will be resolved, which is a critical thing. Allow me to address those three limbs by suggesting the following amendments on the Bill. I urge Sen. Obure to look at Clause 40(a)(2) The Tribunal Composition. In (1), you have said that the chairperson should be a man of that standing and nominated by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). I would like you to align this with the current status of administration of justice. There is already a legal provision where we have created the Office of the Ombudsman that is responsible for the administration of justice. So, this person should not be identified by the JSC but the ombudsman because he is the one responsible for the administration of justice. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, the second amendment that I would like to make on the composition is that there is an attempt in (d) to introduce parents. You cannot bring parents into this tribunal. It is tantamount to you presiding over your own case. Every parent would like a situation where their child is rated to have gotten an A. So, they should comfortably wait for a fair system of appeal that gives them justice and not for them to sit on that team. They will push their case. So, I suggest that in (d), persons nominated by parents with their parents’ interest should be left out. Further, let me also caution that if you look at the composition of this tribunal, you are concentrating there people who have an interest. The person in (a) has no interest. The person in (b), headteachers, has an interest. All headteachers want their schools to do well. In fact, in some of the instances, some of the unscrupulous heads of schools influence the examinations. So, you are weighing this with too many people who have an interest. I suggest that we introduce other people who can counter that interest because they have none but they are stakeholders. I, therefore, propose, Sen. Obure, that we have an additional of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Kenya National Examination Council (KNEC). This is because this is the person who is defending the fairness of the exercise that they did. We do not want to assume that all the people at the KNEC have a criminal mind of wanting to support theft. So, this person will sit on the tribunal and defend the KNEC and say that any fault was not necessarily that of the KNEC. I would also like you to add one person nominated by owners of private schools which have become a major industry in this country. Therefore, if we allow these other stakeholders to be there – the headteachers of public schools and so on – we must also allow the owners of private academies and schools to sit on this tribunal. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, I would also like to convince you that we include one man and one woman appointed by the Commission for Higher Education. Why? They are the immediate recipients of these students. So, they are unlikely to sit there and preside over a result that is being allowed for a young man or woman who will not go The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposes"
}