Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 884711,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/884711/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 94,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Speaker",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "On its part, Article 251 of the Constitution provides a specific procedure for the removal from office of a member of a constitutional commission or the holder of an independent office. The Article provides in Clauses (2) and (3), and I quote: “(2) A person desiring the removal of a member of a commission or of a holder of an independent office on any ground specified in clause (1) may present a petition to the National Assembly setting out the alleged facts constituting that ground. (3) The National Assembly shall consider the petition and, if it is satisfied that it discloses a ground under clause (1), shall send the petition to the President.” Hon. Members, the bone of contention, as discerned from the submissions made by Members with regard to the point raised by the Leader of the Majority Party is whether the removal of a member of a constitutional commission, in this case the IEBC, can be legally initiated through a resolution of the House. On this matter, I am constrained to agree with the view that the only procedure that the Constitution envisages for the initiation of the removal of a member of a constitutional commission or holder of an independent office is through a petition to the House in accordance with Article 251 of the Constitution. As ably noted in the submissions by Hon. Kaluma, the provisions of Article 95(5) are couched in general terms whereas those of Article 251 are specific to a particular class of State officers. Indeed, as Members are aware, the House only initiates the removal from office of the President, the Deputy President and a Cabinet Secretary through a Motion filed by any Member under the specific provisions of Articles 144 and 145 through to Article 150 and Article 152 of the Constitution, respectively. Hon. Members, conversely, specific provisions of the Constitution provide removal procedures peculiar to other State officers. Members will note that the Constitution provides specific methods of removal from office of other State officers as follows: a) Members of Parliament may only vacate office in specific circumstances including recall under Article103 and upon determination by court by declaring the seat vacant under Article 105(1)(b)of the Constitution. b) Judges and magistrates may only be removed from office via a petition lodged with the Judicial Service Commission under Articles 168 and 172(1)(c)of the Constitution. c) The Secretary to the Cabinet is appointed with the approval of Parliament, but may only be dismissed by the President under Article 154 of the Constitution. d) The Director of Public Prosecutions is appointed with the approval of Parliament, but his or her removal may only be initiated via a petition lodged with the Public Service Commission under Article 158 of the Constitution. e) A county governor may only be removed from office in line with a procedure prescribed by legislation enacted pursuant to Article 181 of the Constitution. Hon. Members, if the House were to be persuaded by the argument that it does rely on Article 95(5) generally to initiate the removal of IEBC commissioners, the House must also convince itself that the same argument would hold in the event any committee of this House were to table a report recommending the removal of the President, the Deputy President, Cabinet Minister, Judge, Member of Parliament, governor or the Director of Public Prosecutions in similar fashion."
}