Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 961516,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/961516/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 356,
    "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": " In fairness to Hon. Oundo, he has used the same wordings as the previous amendment. He has used the words “may cause any official statistical data”. That is the same wording he has used. So, defeating his proposed amendment on that account may not work. However, I oppose his amendment for a number of reasons. First of all, let us broaden our thinking beyond statistics and the census. Let us even go to elections. In this country, we know that at any one time, at least, for the last five-or-so sets of elections, the results which are usually official results are usually revised. We even get to a situation where the court nullifies those results. Now, what happens to those who had quoted those official results? Nothing. It is extremely dangerous to start bringing legal consequences to those who do their work in good faith because the results are cancelled for one reason or another. My second point is: When you use the word “indemnity’’, it even includes monetary compensation. As long as it can include, then there is a technical legal point we must bear in mind. No money Bill or amendment can be introduced in this House which has not been considered by the Budget ad Appropriations Committee and the Treasury because it has a monetary implication. So, the question will be: Has this particular aspect of possible compensation been considered? The answer is probably no. So, I respectfully want to persuade Hon. Oundo to drop that particular amendment. Thank you."
}