Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 896010,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/896010/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 196,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Seme, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. (Dr.) James Nyikal",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 434,
        "legal_name": "James Nyikal",
        "slug": "james-nyikal"
    },
    "content": "If a company does not have a physical residence here, it becomes very difficult to conduct due diligence on it. Therefore, I think without digging into the law lawyers will tell you that you cannot trade here if you are not registered. What does this mean? If this can happen in an organisation charged with the responsibility of conducting elections in Kenya, which must have utmost knowledge of law, and this happens under their watch, then something is grossly wrong. Is it that these people are incompetent, are there structural problems or can we easily say this is just corruption in Kenya? In my mind, recommendation No.1 proposed by Hon. Kaluma is extremely important. If there is a legal framework that seems to be conflicting…We know that under Chapter 15 of the Constitution, commissions are independent. Looking at the Constitution, they may work fulltime or overtime but most of them are fulltime and executive. If they are executive and then the IEBC law gives the secretariat power, we have a situation where there is a conflict because the secretariat feels they have the power and the Commission also feels they have the power. In my mind, we need to address this. Maybe, this is why we have had so many problems with many commission chairs. If a structural problem exists and is not addressed, it creates problems. We have seen how they behave, we see the Chairman and CEO trying to express their own power while quoting the law, one, the Constitution and the other law. I think the recommendation by Hon. Kaluma is extremely important and it is really what we must look at. Secondly, the Commission failed to exercise oversight. If you have a situation where the commission feels like the executive and actually they are on fulltime employment with offices when do they become oversight organs? The IEBC law seems to give a situation where Commissioners are a board, but the Constitution, in my simple mind, seems to give a situation where they are executive and then we have a quagmire. In that case, even recommendation No.2 will be appropriate, because you then do not know who should play oversight. In my mind, these issues on the legal framework which will give proper authority for oversight and subordinate the secretariat to the Commission is what we require. Without this, I think commissions, even if we change this one, will have problems. I think these issues should be addressed and I support the proposed recommendations."
}