Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 743787,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/743787/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 393,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Oyugi",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 444,
        "legal_name": "Augostinho Neto Oyugi",
        "slug": "augostinho-neto-oyugi"
    },
    "content": "The reason I needed to catch your eye is because of the way he phrases the rest of the amendment. The draft reads, ―…unless otherwise agreed by the parties…‖ The parties in the arbitration ought to be given the first hand in terms of the choice of an arbiter so that its them first having the choice before you assume that there is going to be no choice of an arbiter. He needs to rework that particular one. The third thing is with regard to the rules of arbitration that should apply whenever there is a misunderstanding. You only agree to the rules of arbitration if it is the Registrar of the Nairobi Center of International Arbitration who is going to appoint the arbiter. However, he also needs to appreciate that should the parties choose an arbiter, then they need to agree on a set of rules that they need to be governed with. That is what I need to help him understand. I can see him nodding his head in disagreement, but this is where colleagues learn from each other. On the structure of how arbitration ought to take place, first, it is a partisan arbitration process. So, there should be made a choice of an arbiter. It is only in the absence of a choice of an arbiter that you can then revert to what exists in the normal scenario. You also need to give the rules of arbitration with regard to the prevailing context. I hope he understands what I am saying."
}