GET /api/v0.1/hansard/entries/64546/?format=api
HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 64546,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/64546/?format=api",
"text_counter": 299,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. M. Kilonzo",
"speaker_title": "The Minister for Justice, National Cohesion and Constitutional Affairs",
"speaker": {
"id": 47,
"legal_name": "Mutula Kilonzo",
"slug": "mutula-kilonzo"
},
"content": " Madam Temporary Deputy Chairlady, I beg to oppose this amendment for the simple reason that as a country and as I said during the Second Reading, we are grappling with a situation in which we must show that we are introducing best practices including best international practices. I already drew the attention of this House to the very big and famous 2007 Edition of the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct. I wish to persuade my learned friend that if he were to listen only to Paragraph 215 at page 141, he would be persuaded, as I have been, that temperance must be left behind. It says that:- âIn court and in chambers, a judge should always act courteously and respect the dignity of all who are doing business there. A judge should also require similar courtesy from those who appear before him or her and from courtâs staff and other subject to the judgeâs direction or control. A judge should be above personal animosities and must not have favouritists among advocates appearing before the court. Unjustified reprimands of counsels, offensive remarks about litigants or witnesses, cruel jokes and sarcasm and intemperate behavior by a judge undermine both order and decorum in the court. When a judge intervenes, he or she should ensure that impartiality and the perception of impartiality are not adversely affected by the manner of interventionâ."
}