Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 748689,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/748689/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 115,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Wandayi",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 2960,
        "legal_name": "James Opiyo Wandayi",
        "slug": "james-opiyo-wandayi"
    },
    "content": "firstly, and then Article 50 of the Treaty. The judgement also addresses that matter. My view is that this Report is basically going to take us backwards instead of helping us to advance forward. Therefore, it is going to waste a lot of time and we have no time on our hands. The true meaning of an election is that people, in this case Members of Parliament, exercise their right to determine who they want to represent the country in EALA. It has also been argued correctly that an election can happen whether we have one or two nominees to a particular elective position. An election does not cease to exist merely because there is one nominee to a particular position. It still remains an election. In this case, I am even surprised because CORD is entitled to four slots and yet, we are being told by the Committee that already CORD has five nominees - which means that CORD has even gone further to nominate more than the number of slots they have under the Treaty, the rules and everything else. What necessitates the Committee’s recommendation that Cord nominates three times the number of slots it is entitled to? What is the Committee using to come to that conclusion? Is it the ruling of the court? The answer is no. Is it Article 50 of the Treaty? The answer is no. Is it Rule 6(1) of the EALA rules? The answer is no. We can only conclude that the only thing that is driving this Committee in making those far-reaching recommendations is politics! We must say no to politics as a driver to such a sensitive exercise. If Jubilee was magnanimous enough to bring 15 names, that is fine. Perhaps, it was playing good politics to entice its membership even though they knew that ultimately, only five will go through. CORD, in its wisdom, has submitted four names. I was not in this House in 2012. We must also remember that in 2012, the Kenya National African Union (KANU) party was entitled to one slot in EALA. That time, KANU nominated only one person. To be exact, it was one Sara Bonaya, who was eventually elected unopposed. She went ahead to represent KANU in EALA. Why was it then not necessary for KANU to be compelled to add more names for elections to happen? We cannot, as a House, entertain this Report. Unless it is amended appropriately to delete that offending section which is compelling us to add more names, we must reject it. I will ask the House to proceed with the elections. I know what is motivating this mischievous recommendation. There are people here who are hell-bent on determining CORD nominates to EALA. There are people here who are hell-bent to fight the minority communities, particularly the Maa Community. The CORD is the only coalition which has nominated a person from the Maa Community, a very distinguished lady and lawyer who needs to represent this country in EALA. The Maa Community has been marginalised for generations from the beginning of this republic or the time we got Independence. If the motivation is to ensure that the CORD nominees, who represent the marginalised communities, are eventually rejected, then the country must see for itself what Jubilee is up to."
}