Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 706560,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/706560/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 217,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Ndiritu",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 1539,
        "legal_name": "Samuel Mathenge Ndiritu",
        "slug": "samuel-mathenge-ndiritu"
    },
    "content": "law. It seeks to preserve an effective and impartial system of justice. Finally, it maintains public confidence in the administration of justice by court. Basically, it is strengthening the courts and making it very clear that the purpose here is not to curtail the jurisdiction and the independence of court. I listened to a Member who talked about the ineffectiveness of State organs with regard to being contemptuous of court or wilfully, without lawful excuse, disobeying orders or directions of the court. The biggest culprits here are the law enforcers, the police. It has also mentioned, specifically, the wrongful possession of land from any person who has obtained possession by an order of the court. I am specifically referring to this because it seems the area I represent has been a victim of this. Courts have given orders and orders but the police or law enforcers just say they cannot implement. We have seen people suffering and being dispossessed of their land and property. It should come out very clearly. I would even wish that there is a clause that can make observance and enforcement possible to make State organs, especially law enforcers, able to implement this section. Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, because of the ineffectiveness or helplessness with which law enforcers disobey court orders, it is good the offences have now been properly defined. I still feel it is good if we could have a clause that sort of puts some weight in the enforcement of orders that the court has given. It is now very clear that for any citizen, you will not be cowed. There is a reference point if you feel that the court, the magistrate or State organs have mistreated you. Like I said in the beginning, those who do not understand will not even know whether coughing in court is a crime or is contempt of court but this properly defines it. When we look at the objects of the Bill, they provide for contempt of court proceeding. It provides for the High Court to punish for contempt of subordinate courts and sets out procedure for contempt in a superior court. It gives the separation and the lower courts now clearly know their jurisdiction. It will not be possible for a magistrate in a junior court to go beyond the bounds the law allows. It is a very progressive Bill. I believe there is still an opportunity to fine tune and put some proper measures that will even make it have teeth without being dictatorial because the feeling is that previously there was a lot of injustice. The courts had a field day and litigants almost did not know where to hang onto. They would find themselves jailed or fined. It was a sort of a harassment tool on the side of the Judiciary to the subjects. With those few remarks, I support the Bill. Where we feel there is a deficiency, it can be corrected."
}