GET /api/v0.1/hansard/entries/84595/?format=api
HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 84595,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/84595/?format=api",
"text_counter": 284,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Gunda",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": {
"id": 25,
"legal_name": "Benedict Fondo Gunda",
"slug": "benedict-gunda"
},
"content": "Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for giving me this opportunity to contribute to this Bill. I have a few comments to make. First is on the functions of the Commission and Clause 4(c) talks about the functions of the Commission. The Commission is supposed to work with each constitutional commission to ensure that the letter and the spirit of the Constitution is respected. We hope that once the Commission is up and running, the issue of chicken and egg will come to an end. That is because if we are talking about respecting the letter and spirit of the Constitution, then let us leave issues to do with implementation of this Constitution to the Commission. It has been given adequate functions to make sure that the implementation is carried forward. Secondly, I feel that Clause 12(2) should be deleted because it goes against the spirit of Clause 12(1). When we say in subsection (1) âWhere a vacancy occurs in the membership of the Commission in accordance with Section 11, the President shall nominate a member for approval by the National Assembly in accordance with Section 8â, that covers it. When we now say in subsection (2), âNotwithstanding the provision of subsection (1), the President may select a nominee from a list provided by the Public Service Commission under Section 8(5) for purposes of filling a vacancyâ, what we are really doing is giving the President an open hand to nominate members to the Commission. So, I feel that subsection (2) should really not be there; it should be deleted. Under Miscellaneous Provisions, Clause 26(1) says that the Commission shall prepare a progress report every six months and submit the report to the Parliamentary Select Committee and the President. It is my feeling that we should be consistent because if the selection of the members for approval by Parliament has been done by the President in consultation with the Prime Minister, the report should also be submitted to the Prime Minister and the President. That also goes for Clause 27(2) where again, the report is presented to the President and Parliament. Since the Prime Minister was involved in the selection with the President, it is only fair that the Prime Minister is also given a copy of that report. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, on the First Schedule on the Oath of Affirmation, I do not know if this was an error and if it was not, it is Mr. Gunda who is not able to interpret it correctly. But when it says: âI------ having been appointed (the chairperson/member of/ Secretary to) the Commission for the Implementation of the Constitution under the Commission for the Implementation Commission Act, 2010---â I feel there is something missing. I thought it would be âunder the Commission for the Implementation of the Constitution Actâ. Maybe, the Minister can have a look at that particular Oath of Affirmation. Under Clause 8 of the Memorandum of Objects and Reasons, it provides for the procedure of appointment and requires the President to declare the vacancies at the Commission in the Gazette. I thought that was to be done in consultation with the Prime Minister. Maybe, the Minister can check that particular one again. That also goes for Part IV on the last page where it deals with miscellaneous matters. Clause 26 requires the Commission to make its progress report every six months. The report is to be forwarded to the President. Again, the Prime Minister, having been involved in selecting the Commission, should also receive these reports. Those are issues which the Minister can look at and make the necessary amendments. Otherwise, with those few remarks, I support the Bill."
}