Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 647700,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/647700/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 173,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Waiganjo",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 2644,
        "legal_name": "John Muriithi Waiganjo",
        "slug": "john-muriithi-waiganjo"
    },
    "content": "Thank you, Hon. Speaker. I rise to second the Judiciary Fund Bill. I simply want to emphasize what the Mover of the Bill has said. Basically, this is a legal framework for creation of this Fund, as opposed to this Fund being created by regulations. I completely agree that creating a fund through regulations is quite irregular. Therefore, anchoring it in law is the right way to go. This is a Bill whose time has come, particularly because it is very important for the Judiciary to maintain its own independence. One of the ways that we can make sure that the Judiciary is fully independent is by ensuring that it has its own Fund and also to make sure that it is accountable. It is important that we pass this Bill. For a long time now, the Judiciary has been accusing this House of slashing its budget. Once we establish this Fund, it will be clear that the Judiciary has its own resources. More importantly, the Judiciary generates a lot of money, particularly through the filing fees in their registries and the fines it levies. Therefore, apart from the Exchequer, this Fund will be generated by the Judiciary itself. It is also very important that this money is retained to ensure continuity of the projects that the Judiciary has. Lately, we have seen an explosive development by the Judiciary. We should commend them on that. We want this to continue because every county needs a High Court. Although there is serious progression towards that achievement, it will happen in a quicker way once the Judiciary has its own Fund. This is in Article 173 of the Constitution. What we are doing is that we are grounding it on the Judicial Service Act but, at the same time, we are complying with the provisions of the Constitution. Under the new constitutional order, the separation of power is more emphasized than ever before. We also want to see a situation where the three arms of the Government operate completely independent of one another but interdependent of one another. We do not want any institution or arm of government to accuse the Legislature of disabling it or being an obstacle to the achievement of their constitutional mandates. Parliament is a House of rules and procedures. It is our mandate to make laws. This Parliament will be proud of making a law such as the Judiciary Fund Act. Therefore, I second this Bill and inform the members of this House that it is the most progressive Bill. We need to pass it and ensure that the Judiciary is independent. We should not give the Judicial Service Commission any excuse when they fail in their duties to hit back at the Legislature. With those few remarks, Hon. Speaker, I beg to second."
}