Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 789175,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/789175/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 134,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Maore",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13344,
        "legal_name": "Richard Maore Maoka",
        "slug": "richard-maore-maoka"
    },
    "content": "Speakers all over the Commonwealth, it is not appropriate to injunct Parliament. It is not appropriate when a matter is pending before the House, you go to court and say Parliament has no power and the court entertains that story. So, we are safe by deleting this amendment and not entertaining a contest between the Judiciary and the Legislature at this point. So, I want to second by saying that anybody who believes in the Judiciary that a sitting judge cannot be vetted by Parliament, they should go and do something about the provisions of Article 250 (2) (a) and (b) whereby it states: “identified and recommended for appointment in a manner prescribed by national legislation; approved by the National Assembly.” If it is somebody meant to be in a commission, the procedure before it goes to the President is the approval by the National Assembly. For that reason, I support this amendment. I invite my colleagues to stop anybody in future from entertaining the story of injuncting Parliament by saying the matter is sub judice and you cannot deliberate on it and yet, it was in Parliament before it went to court. Therefore, for that reason, I want to invite your input. What do we do in the face of this Report that is talking about sub judice apart from amending it and deleting that part? Thank you, Hon. Speaker."
}