GET /api/v0.1/hansard/entries/844164/?format=api
HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 844164,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/844164/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 81,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Speaker",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "(c) Whether the said six months restriction of Standing Order 49(1) is applicable to a petition filed by an aggrieved member of the public. Other Members, particularly the Member for Saboti, Hon. Caleb Luyayi Amisi, the Member for Kanduyi, Hon. Wafula Wamunyinyi, and the Member for Homa Bay Town, Hon. Peter Kaluma, also weighed in on the matter vide letters addressed to my office on 14th and 15th August 2018. The requests by Hon. Wafula Wamunyinyi and Hon. Kaluma are of similar import as that by Hon. Anthony Oluoch. On his part, Hon. Amisi sought leave to introduce a Motion to establish a select committee to relook into matters relating to the sugar sector. Before I proceed to guide the House, let me first explain the concept of reversal of decisions of the House. As you would expect, the concept of rescission may be traced to the practice and tradition of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, along which Kenya’s Parliament was modeled. Much of these practices and traditions have been chronicled in various editions of Erskine May’s A Treatise on the Law, Privileges, Proceedings and Usage of Parliament . Erskine May contemplates three ways of reversal of decisions already made by a House of Parliament. The first is through a discharge of an order. Secondly, a decision may be reversed through a declaration of an order that proceedings be null and void. Finally, there is rescission, which is the subject of my Communication, particularly so because of the three forms of reversal of House decisions, rescission is entrenched in the National Assembly Standing Orders and practice. It ought to be understood at the earliest opportunity that, in principle, a hallowed Chamber of Parliament was expected to take a decision on a matter, having conscientiously applied itself to the substance of the matter and consequence on a decision it makes, one way or the other. That is why, as recorded by Erskine May’s A Treatise on the Law, Privileges,Proceedings and Usage of Parliament, 24th Edition, on Page 426: “A question, being once made and carried in the affirmative or negative, cannot be questioned again, but must stand as a judgment of the House.’"
}