Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 66165,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/66165/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 327,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Olago",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 5,
        "legal_name": "John Olago Aluoch",
        "slug": "john-aluoch"
    },
    "content": "Mr. Speaker, Sir, I rise on a point of order to seek direction and guidance from the Chair on an issue that is currently galvanizing the attention, not just of the House, but also of the country, that is, how the twin doctrines of sub judice and injunction apply to proceedings of the House and, in particular, how they impact on the current proceedings in the Committees of the House dealing with the issues of nomination to Judicial and Finance offices by His Excellency the President. Mr. Speaker, Sir, in seeking your direction and guidance, I wish first of all to state that Committees of this House are not creatures of the House itself. They are creatures of the Constitution. I wish to kindly refer to Clause 124 of the Constitution that states amongst others: “The House of Parliament may establish Committees and shall make Standing Orders for the orderly conduct of its proceedings, including proceedings of its Committees.” Mr. Speaker, Sir, I am quoting this because, Committees and proceedings before Committees and Standing Orders of this House have their foundation in the very Constitution of this country. Therefore, they are not rules and they are not proceedings. I remember that you said against your own wisdom that the Speaker will not interpret the Constitution. But the Speaker will confine himself in so far as the Constitution concerns the proceedings of the House. That was the right position, which I really respect and for which, I am very proud as a Member of this House under your guide. But, Mr. Speaker, Sir, I wish to refer specifically to page four of your ruling, in which you said something. You are dealing with the issue of proper interpretation of the Constitution and function of the Judiciary."
}