Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 632184,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/632184/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 207,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Wetangula",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 3036,
        "legal_name": "Timothy Wanyonyi Wetangula",
        "slug": "timothy-wanyonyi-wetangula"
    },
    "content": "Thank you, Hon. Speaker for giving me a chance to add my voice to this Bill. From the outset, as has been said by the previous speakers, this is a bad Bill. If we pass it, it is going to give us a very bad image. It is going to negate the gains made in our previous landmark legislation. This Bill is premised upon the advisory opinion by the Supreme Court in the matter of the National Land Commission, 2014, Advisory Opinion Reference No.2 of 2014, wherein the NLC sought clarity on various issues from the Supreme Court. Some of the issues that the NLC went to court to clarify were on land administration and management functions, land taxation and revenues and human resource. With regard to human resource, that was about how the officers who were in the previous regime would be managed, either by the Ministry before the creation of the NLC or by the Cabinet Secretary. Those are some of the issues that the NLC sought clarity on in the Supreme Court. Another issue was whether land registration was a function of the NLC or the Ministry. Who was responsible for the land registrars? The Supreme Court made a very clear opinion on this matter. If the advisory opinion of the Supreme Court was properly adopted, the drafters of this Bill should have looked at it when they were coming up with these amendments so that they clarify certain issues in the National Land Commission Act. Let me quote verbatim what the Supreme Court said:- “One of the things that the NLC had sought an advisory on was on the words “recommend, advise, research, investigative, encourage, assess, monitor and oversight”, which are all actions that provide a facilitative role and not a primary one. The context in which these words are used presumes that there is another body or organ whom such a recommendation, advice, research, investigations, encouragement and assessment shall be sent to, received by and relation to which the proposal shall be implemented. There is, therefore, a clear separation of roles between a body providing oversight and a body upon which the oversight is to be conducted”. This is the clear distinction between the roles performed by the Ministry and the NLC. Hon. Speaker, Clause 16 of the Bill provides for removal of spousal interest and consent without any justification. Families have agonised over property that is mortgaged or sold without spousal knowledge. Further, trust plays a vital role in the management of assets for beneficiaries. 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."
}