Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 66196,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/66196/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 358,
    "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": " On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, Sir. I have had an opportunity to look at the documents that my learned friend has tabled. I have enormous amount of respect for him and also as a lawyer. I would like to ask whether I would be in order to suggest that this country should not work itself into a paralysis. It is beginning to emerge that, as we debate the constitutional provisions of the country, that paralysis that sends a sense of fear; a sense of insecurity and a sense of disquiet in the country is very unfortunate. It is unfortunate because my learned friend is suggesting that we use the rule on sub judice and yet it says – I am reading Standing Order No.80 – that a matter shall be considered to be sub judice when it refers to active criminal or civil proceedings when the discussion of such matter is likely to prejudice its fair determination. The word is “likely to prejudice its fair determination.” I have had occasion only late afternoon to look at the ruling of the learned judge and it seems to me that he has already made a decision that the nomination of the five, without a woman, is unconstitutional. Therefore, strictly speaking, if we were to accept this matter is sub judice, we will merely paralyze this very essential debate that is taking place in the country. The question is what prejudice then do our women really suffer when Parliament, which is an institution, not only for purposes of legislation but also for implementing the Constitution, continues its work under the Constitution and under the Standing Orders? Therefore, I am persuaded that, much as I feel so much pain that my country, after merely six months, has not really comes to terms with the issue of implementing the Constitution, nor has it realized that it is required to establish what my learned friend, the Chair of the Constitutional Implementation Oversight Committee called a “constitutional culture”. That is the debate. In that debate, no single institution or person - ever for the rest of history - will have the last word. Therefore, I wish to appeal to you, using the enormous skills that you have developed in the last--- In fact, when I was practicing law with you, I did not know, for once, that you would rise to the Solomonian status that you have been elevated in the recent past."
}