Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 624238,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/624238/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 265,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Oyugi",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 444,
        "legal_name": "Augostinho Neto Oyugi",
        "slug": "augostinho-neto-oyugi"
    },
    "content": "to the Constitution did not anticipate. Section 15(2)(c) of the Transitional and Consequential Provisions of the Constitution says:- “The legislation mentioned to in subsection (1) shall permit the asymmetrical devolution of powers to ensure that functions are devolved promptly to counties that have the capacity to perform them but that no county is given functions it cannot perform.” That is the reason for creating TA. If at all the first interpretation is true, that you are saying by dint of the Constitution the term of TA has lapsed, can we, as a House that makes law, then leave devolution issues to go in the manner that they were anticipated? I am happy that the KLRC is saying that the term of TA is not fixed by that section of the Constitution. So, the best way for us to proceed is to see how best we can use the TA as it is. We cannot be in transition forever. Can we then have a devolution oversight authority made out of this law so that, at least, the functions, devolution and the conflicts are addressed? The reason why we had TA, in my understanding, is that it ought to have been an arbiter between the national Government, the county governments and the various vested interests in devolution. We know for a fact that those vested interests still exist. So, if TA, which is the arbiter exits, what are we doing? We are simply saying that everyone is on their own and the spoils can go either way. If we proceeded that way, it would be very dangerous for devolution. We would have killed something that was very important. Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, I beg that you find that an interpretation of Section 15(1) of the Transitional and Consequential Provisions of the Constitution does not mean that the TA has a term limit that is set by the Constitution. However, even if you were to find that, that is the position that they have a three-year term limit – although that is not the reading of this particular section – then can we as a House that makes law see a way in which we can have an oversight authority that looks at devolution with the knowledge the TA has, so that we have TA transit itself into a body that oversees devolution?"
}