Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 711307,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/711307/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 103,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Speaker",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Hon. Members, in our case, the law relating to internal party disciplinary measures has since been radically changed by the Constitution and the enactment and amendment of our electoral laws. Article 47 of the Constitution, Sub- Article 1, provides that every person has a right to administrative action that is expeditious, efficient, lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair. In addition, Committees are established pursuant to Article 124 of the Constitution for the orderly conduct of the proceedings of the House . Consequently, membership to a committee forms part of the endeavour to ensure the orderly conduct of the proceedings of the House. In my opinion and as is the practice in comparative jurisdictions, for a parliamentary party to de-whip its members, the reason for the action must necessarily relate to an act or omission by the members that relates to the business of the House. This is particularly as espoused in my preceding examples of the United Kingdom Labour and Conservative parties’ codes of conduct that require members to behave in a way that is consistent with the policies of their parties, to have a good voting record and not to bring the party into disrepute in the House. The decision to deny a member the right to actively participate in committees without a right to fair administrative action and for reasons unrelated to the business of the House would, in my opinion, offend the letter and the spirit of Articles 74 and 124 of the Constitution. Hon. Members, though the decision to de-whip a member from a committee is one to be made internally by a parliamentary party, the current Standing Order No.176 neither incorporates the need for the decision of the party to be based on any grounds nor does it provide for a procedure affording the affected member a right to be heard. When compared against the extensive provisions under the Political Parties Act with regard to the discipline of members by parties that sponsored them to the House, the inadequacy of the Standing Order, which parliamentary parties would use to discipline their members within the House, becomes apparent. You will agree that this clear disparity calls for an urgent review of the text of that Standing Order. Hon. Members, the issue of enforcing party discipline within the House through discharge of members from Committees is indeed a serious issue that requires conscious consideration by all. I am aware that the Procedure and House Rules Committee, which I chair, is considering the matter at length. Since I will be expected to preside in the House during the debate on the matter at hand, I request to excuse myself from the Committee until the end of that process. In the meantime, I request the Members of the Committee to ensure that the report on the consideration of these concerns is tabled soonest possible to allow the House to substantively consider the recommendations arrived at and deal with this recurring concern. In the meantime, until this House addresses the question of the appropriate process for the discharge of members from committees, including putting in place formal mechanisms for notification and eventual removal of members from committees, I will not admit any further requests for the discharge of any member from a committee unless the whip of the party proposing the action demonstrates the following: The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor."
}