Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 848339,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/848339/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 242,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "one of 12th July, 2018 to him and he still sent us another one. We have refused this order for it does not cater for Section 108 and Section 109 in terms of particularity. We have even quoted in this Report a court case which says that the Environmental Restoration Order under Section 108 is like a final order. That is why that final order must be very particular. If it is not particular, you cannot enforce it. That case seeks to say that this must be the final order. To that extent, the criminal liability and civil liability of Mr. Perry Mansukh and his cohorts in this Report is clear. I do not need to get to further details. I have also stated in the last mandate to find a method to restore the people of Solai. We have suggested that an environmental audit be done by an expert. It is contemplated in the Environmental Management and Coordination (Deposit Bonds) Regulations 2014 that I have just mentioned. The competent expert is defined as a multi- skilled team of environmental impact assessment or environmental audit experts licenced by the authority with speciality in environmental financial assurance, including environmental deposit bond. Why do we say this and why have we suggested what would appear to be a very drastic measure? We have done so because NEMA stands accused. We do not trust NEMA to do this audit because they are accused. This can only be done outside this framework for supervision by another team. It cannot also be done by Kenya Water Resources Management Authority (WARMA), Nakuru. We have proposed that WARMA, Nakuru, in its entirety, be charged in court for abdicating duty in its entirety. I have already spoken to the third mandate about ensuring that the dam owner makes compensation. The reason as to why we have suggested that there must be a calculation of the quantum payable is because--- The only way to make Mr. Perry Mansukh and his cohorts to pay for the damage they have caused, just for the death and livelihoods, is to have a figure. This figure can only be enforced by a court order from the High Court, the Environmental and Land Court. That way, if he does not pay, then it can be pursued as a decree which can attach part of his land. He has a lot of it. On the one on environment, if he does restore, it can then be enforced. Similarly, we have suggested several amendments to the law and Section 143, which is the one that is the enforcement mechanism of the Environmental Restoration Order. The contradiction in Section 143 is that “in default of restoration, the person who has defaulted is subject to imprisonment for one year and a fine of Kshs4 million.” Mr. Perry Mansukh, in the middle of these investigations, gave out Kshs35 million in what he called consolation. This consolation was like a poisoned chalice. The consolation was accompanied by a form called an indemnity form. That indemnity form was absolving him and his directors from liability. Who distributed these forms? It was the County Commissioner of Nakuru. Who accompanied him? He was accompanied by the Deputy County Commissioner (DCC), Subukia. Who was witnessing? The Chief, Solai. We have suggested that these three people be charged with obstruction of justice because it is a contradiction for the Government of Kenya to charge Mr. Perry Mansukh, his directors and managers and for the same Government officials to go dishing out forms - which were signed under duress - to the victims of the Solai Dam Tragedy. They must be charged in court for obstructing justice. The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposes only. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor, Senate."
}