Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 718801,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/718801/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 162,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Wetangula",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 3036,
        "legal_name": "Timothy Wanyonyi Wetangula",
        "slug": "timothy-wanyonyi-wetangula"
    },
    "content": "There is also the issue of retirement of the Chief Justice and his emoluments. All that is addressed here! I believe this is good because we have had issues where, for example, when the former Vice-President and former Prime Minister retired. We started playing politics with it. They could not even address the issues of their retirement benefits. This is their right which they should enjoy because they have given service to this country. It does not matter whether they remain active in politics or not. They are entitled to it because they served in those offices and capacity for this nation. So, the retirement of the Chief Justice and his retirement benefits are well captured. I believe that we should go further and address other officers who have also retired. On the issue of Sexual Offences Act, the person who brought this amendment must have his head examined because this is outrageous. A person at the age of 16 is a child. I believe that if we play these kinds of games with our children, then we are not serious. I believe this House should not allow this kind of amendment to see the light of the day. We are literally going to make bad laws that will allow abuse of our children. We are going to allow sexual offenders to take advantage of this law and start harassing those young kids. At the age of 16, a child is in Form Three. I do not see what kind of responsibility such a child can undertake. He or she is still dependent on others to make informed decisions. This amendment is not the right one. I do not know what informed the person who brought it. When it gets to the Committee Stage, this should be removed. On the issue of the Independent Policing Oversight Authority (IPOA), we are making one step forward and two steps backward. Every time, we have had issues with that Authority because there are people who are anti-reforms in the police sector. They have always wanted to remove this IPOA from existence. Whatever the functions of this office, it should be allowed to do its work. I do not know why we are trying to bring in the issues of documents, information 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."
}