Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 950321,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/950321/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 212,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Rarieda, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. (Dr.) Otiende Amollo",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13465,
        "legal_name": "Paul Otiende Amollo",
        "slug": "paul-otiende-amollo"
    },
    "content": " Thank you, Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker. I rise to oppose this proposed Bill that is amending the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act. I have perused and read the report by the Departmental Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs on this proposal. I note the observation that the proposal would be a violation of the rights of an accused person. On page 13, they cited a decision of the Supreme Court. That is the correct position. If this Bill is passed, it would be a violation of the Constitution. Article 50(2)(p) gives every accused person the benefit of the least severe of the prescribed punishments. The idea of prescribing mandatory minimum sentences as proposed in the Bill would not only violate Article 50(2) but also Article 25(c) of the Constitution. Secondly, the Bill proposes to remove judicial discretion. Every judicial official, after considering the facts and circumstances, is entitled to determine the appropriate sentence. If you prescribe a mandatory minimum sentence as this Bill proposes, it takes away that discretion and yet, that is a constitutional discretion under Article 159 of the Constitution. Under that Article, judicial authority resides only in the Judiciary. 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."
}