HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 927997,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/927997/?format=api",
"text_counter": 154,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Kiminini, FORD-K",
"speaker_title": "Hon. (Dr.) Chris Wamalwa",
"speaker": {
"id": 1889,
"legal_name": "Chrisantus Wamalwa Wakhungu",
"slug": "chrisantus-wamalwa-wakhungu"
},
"content": "gender. I request that you also clarify in terms of the Majority and the Minority. That will be important. It will play a critical role. The Committee Chairperson only mentioned the issue of the two males and two females. We have political parties under the current system of governance, the presidential system. If possible, if you will allow, when we go to the Committee of the whole House, we can amend the Bill for purposes of clarity. If we leave a loophole, then we have rogue PSC Commissioners coming on board – I am not saying that you are rogue, Hon. Speaker. You are the Chairperson – they might decide, because there is no clarity, to pick all the IEBC Commissioners from the either the Majority side or from the Minority side. On the church, I know an amendment has been done. In the previous provisions, we had more provisions for the church because we have trust and faith that the church will not be biased in terms of interviews. Now, we have given them two slots yet we have many faith-based organisations in this country. For example, we have National Council of Churches of Kenya - NCCK, Kenya Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Pentecostal Churches and the Muslims. My wish was that because we have, at least four major ones, they should have had four slots. The moment you give them two, there will be a scramble and it will bring divisions. Where the majority of Members here come from, they have trust in the church. Churches may have committed mistakes here and there, but we know they are people of God. Most of the time, whatever they put across, they have a consensus. The issue of bias when you have religious institutions is minimal. I am questioning other commissions like the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC). What is it coming to do? There is a provision that the EACC has to nominate someone. Why? Theirs is to focus heavily on matters of corruption and economic crimes. When it comes to issue like elections, I do not think they should be there. They already have a role when it comes to Chapter Six of the Constitution on Leadership and Integrity. So, on the EACC, as we move on, I shall propose an amendment to remove them. They should not be given a slot. I do not see their connection and why they should be given a slot in the selection panel to nominate IEBC Commissioners. On the Public Service Commission, I support them. In many other commissions, we have seen the Public Service Commission selecting commissioners. Personally, I would not have had a problem if the selection panel were to be replaced by the Public Service Commission and nominees from the Parliamentary Service Commission because when it comes to the general elections, the players are the people who come to this House. On the Attorney-General, he is the chief legal adviser of the Government. I do not see value in him being there. I listened carefully when the Chairperson of the Departmental Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs was moving. I expected him to say something to justify why he is there. I am not for that. With the Law Society of Kenya it is okay. I support them being there. But on EACC and the Attorney-General, I am not convinced about them. As we move on, I will be able to bring amendments. I am happy about the seven days. It is very good. Immediately you clear, you quickly forward, but there is a critical issue that has not been addressed. When it comes to the selection panel, there is a ranking of position one, two and three. I remember in the last selection panel, there were some allegations that a member from the Maasai Community was number one. We are told that they can decide who to go. How I wish we could have put in a clause that once ranking is done from number one to three, we should not leave any loophole or discretion. Whoever becomes number one should be the chair of that selection panel, the way it happened with the Judicial Service Commission. Once they forward, the President had no discretion to decide whether it is number one, two or three. There were critical players in this game. The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposes only. Acertified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor."
}