Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 937029,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/937029/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 357,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Kathiani, WDM-K",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Robert Mbui",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 1750,
        "legal_name": "Robert Mbui",
        "slug": "robert-mbui"
    },
    "content": "When you scrutinise these regulations and look at them against the Statutory Instruments Act, which guides the Committee on Delegated Legislation, then you find that there are some provisions that we cannot support. That is the reason for the annulment. Let me talk about the observations of the Committee. The first observation was the issue of consultation and public participation. Articles 10 and 118 of the Constitution are very clear that there must be adequate public participation. We are looking in the future to have a law on exactly what constitutes public participation. In the eyes of the Committee, we felt that there was not enough public participation carried out by the regulation making authority. We feel that there was no sufficient public participation conducted under Articles 10 and 118 of the Constitution and Sections 5 and 5(a) of the Statutory Instruments Act. The second issue that we observed was the statutory timelines. These regulations are supposed to be submitted to the House within a certain specified period of time. The regulations were published in the Gazette as Legal Notice No. 65 of 2019 on the 24th of May 2019 and submitted to the Clerk of the National Assembly on the 5th of August 2019 and tabled before the House on 11th August 2019. This was actually 14 sitting days outside the statutory timeline stipulated by Section 11 of the Statutory Instruments Act, which therefore means the regulations are null and void. There was also obviously unjustifiable delay in the transmission of the regulations to Parliament which could not be explained. This again contravenes Section 13(j) of the Statutory Instruments Act. The other observation is that regulations 22, 47, 49, 52 and 53 have inappropriately delegated legislative powers. What these provisions kind of imply is that we are giving the PSC an opportunity to make further guidelines. Any guidelines are part of statutory instruments. So, if they bring the guidelines to us we have an opportunity to either approve or annul. Now they have delegated to themselves authority to make further guidelines. So, we felt that obviously we cannot give them a blanket cheque because that would mean they can go and make changes to the law without consulting Parliament any more. That is why we feel those five regulations I have mentioned were inappropriately delegating legislative powers which is contrary to Section 13 (m) of the Statutory Instruments Act. Finally, there is one thing for which they were right. They were not supposed to give a regulation impact statement, which they did not. I want to support the Committee’s recommendation that this House annuls in entirety the said statutory instruments for contravening Sections 5, 5(a), 11(1), 13(j) and 13(m) of the Statutory Instruments Act, 2013."
}