Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 808635,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/808635/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 222,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Uasin Gishu CWR, JP",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. (Ms.) Gladys Boss Shollei",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13278,
        "legal_name": "Gladys Jepkosgei-boss Shollei",
        "slug": "gladys-jepkosgei-boss-shollei"
    },
    "content": "have a reputation with universities where I am a guest lecturer. It is very important that I do not just do something for expediency, as a Member of Parliament. I must do it for my general reputation. The Committee on Delegated Legislation has many distinguished lawyers. There is Hon. Alice Wahome, Hon. Shamallah, Hon. Mariru, Hon. Daniel Maanzo – there are many senior lawyers within that Committee. I do not think any of them could dare taint their reputation by allowing regulations that definitely offend the Constitution and the PFM Act. It is about the rule of law. We need that to be set on the record so that it is not felt that we are not doing what the 11th Parliament did which was not to approve funds for the Senate. A majority of the members of the Committee were not in the 11th Parliament. I do not think they have that memory of what transpired. So, that was one reason the Regulations were found to be contrary to the Constitution. Clearly, there was confusion when these Regulations were published by the PSC. What we have asked the Senate to do is to let this go back to the CS of the National Treasury to publish the Regulations. We said to them and I said this many times that it is safer for us to nullify the Regulations here than for us to approve it then Omtatah or someone will go to court and they will be declared unconstitutional and the matter will be locked in the courts for the next four years or so. It is safer we nullify the Regulations so that they can be brought back and resubmitted to the Committee taking into account that they obey the PFM Act. There was also another reason the Committee nullified these Regulations. It was clear that there was inadequate public participation as required by Articles 10 and 118 of the Constitution and pronouncements that have been made by the courts that it is necessary for public participation to be undertaken before any regulations are published. We clearly looked at the Explanatory Memoranda which was submitted alongside the Regulations and noted that the National Treasury, the Parliamentary Budget Office and Senators were the only people consulted on these Regulations; even Members of the National Assembly were not consulted. The county governments were not consulted. Therefore, that is the second reason these regulations must fail."
}