Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 808588,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/808588/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 175,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Speaker",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Hon. Millie Odhiambo, this is just food for thought. Yes, at the highest level, the Supreme Court, I do not think whether you will find that kind of interference. There will be time taken to look through. Sometimes there are laws that have been passed by both Houses. We have staff who do a lot of research work, including Members who also do research. Some of the Bills would also have received some very serious expert and professional advice from other quarters, may be even from the Executive. Is it right, within the context of separation of powers, that a single judge just goes and says what you have been doing is hogwash? That is food for thought. Maybe, it is high time you started looking at whether you should not cede that particular power and function in Article 163 of the Constitution, which gives functions of the Supreme Court and perhaps indeed even reduce the power of the Supreme Court to deal with appeals so that they can concentrate on matters constitutional and legality of laws and advising the Government as provided for within Article 163 on giving advisory opinions. Then there will be a little bit of respect, but now you give that power to the High Court. So, a single judge just goes and says what you have been doing is all nonsense and then you are told you can appeal. The Supreme Court goes to say: “No, what the Legislature has done was correct.” This is actually what we want as a country. That is food for thought, Hon. Junet, but I agree it is a matter that, perhaps, we need to discuss elsewhere. I agree also there is no harm in making further pronouncement that indeed we will look with disfavour, attempts at derailing the institution of the Legislature. When you injunct a committee of the House, essentially you are telling the House not to work because the House works through committees. It is committees that generate business. All Bills go through committees and committees bring their reports here. If you are not happy, as Hon. Millie Odhiambo has said, you can go and make whatever interpretation of what is the final product because to purport to injunct a committee, which is a creature of the House, is indeed telling the House: “You might as well pack and go home until such time as we will show you or tell you when to sit.” The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposes only. Acertified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor."
}