Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 970050,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/970050/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 33,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Mbuthi Gathenji",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Before I go to the next point that I was going to raise, I do feel that you are being asked to exercise a discretion. A discretion is where somebody has already confirmed that he has transgressed the rules. First and foremost, you must consider that factors for denial of Senate on the exercise of discretion. The Governor is a well-informed person in terms of parliamentary procedures, the deadlines, the consequences and the limits of the Speaker’s discretion. Governor Waititu and his legal advisors had the relevant information contained in the allegation as early as that December through to the date of receiving the invitation. They never tried to file even a skeleton answer or even a shred of defense saying what they had for the time being, this is what we have and when we go before the Senate, we will make an application for substantive documents. They have shown laxity, arrogance and, in actual fact, lack of good faith. As of the 28th of January, they had not even served an advance copy and a draft answer to the counsels or to the House giving an indication as to what they expect to use in this Chamber, and upon which they were asked for leave for any further discretion of this court. It is apparent that the counsels never intended to argue any other matter except preliminary objections. It is very good to be forthright and candid to this House. That is the style they wanted, until the witness testified. The preliminary objection can only be based on information upon which they would have come to controvert the allegation. They cannot come before you and say that they did into have anything. Another important observation is that Governor Waititu had counsels in Kiambu during the Motion consideration. Therefore, they had materials upon which they could have filed a skeleton answer. Mr. Speaker Sir, your discretion should not be trivialized. Somebody should not sit on his rights and come at the last moment. There is nothing--- You have finished! As I said, there must also be equality of arms. We exposed our case. If they come and file documents for an answer, what are they going to say and what are we going to say? Therefore, the dilemma you have now is the reopening of the proceedings from the beginning. You have told us several times and I have seen that you are time bound; you have deadlines. We may also ask for leave to file counter documents and to file fresh statements. How long is this proceeding going to go? Therefore, in my view, the way forward is that this House should invite the counsel for the Assembly to summarise his case through his submission and satisfy you that from the evidence adduced on the allegation has reached a threshold for removal of the Governor in the absence of an answer. Mr. Speaker, Sir, the position of the County Assembly is that the time for evidence is over. In your own discretion, you had given us time to consider this application. I also feel that it is out of your magnanimity that we are arguing this application. You could have determined that in the absence of an answer, no more evidence and cross-examination should be carried out by the counsel for the Governor. I would like my learned friend to proceed further and just wind up the other areas."
}