Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 970166,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/970166/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 149,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Ng’ang’a Mbugua",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "trial or on trial, evaluate any tender? Did he award any tender? In what manner did he directly contravene the procurement law? That we are not told, but then you are being told to impeach him on that ground. You were told that tenders were granted for roads because he was to receive a tithe; 10 per cent. Of course, it is very flowery to say 10 per cent, like we pay tithe in churches. But were you shown evidence of any money that came from any contractor, so that the Governor can be said to have derived a personal benefit from these so-called tenders to sustain that ground? None at all. Whose burden is it to discharge that? It is the Assembly; the burden never shifts. It is not for the Governor to bring evidence and say: “I did not issue tenders or did not receive kick-backs.” They are saying that he received. Where is the evidence? None at all. Mr. Speaker, Sir, how can infractions of failure to disclose pending bills in the Fiscal Strategy Paper amount to an impeachable offence? How? Yes, it may be an infraction. Are there other oversight mechanisms that the Assembly may have deployed to redress that? Certainly, yes. Were they deployed? None. Failure to set up County Budget Economic Forum: first, it was not shown. Part of the evidence that we received late was a schedule showing Members of the County Budget Economic Forum, but again, which, and we respect the decision of this Senate, we were not able to tender because the Senate was of the view that we--- However, there is a budget forum. Our submission is that they needed to show. It is not just allege and push the burden to us; show that it does not exist. Even if it does not exist, I am aware that during the consideration of the impeachment of Gov. Mwangi wa Iria, the Governor of Murang’a, that issue came up and was cited as an infraction. Did it amount to an impeachable ground? Certainly not. In the wisdom of this Senate, they went ahead to say: “Yes, there may have been violations and infractions, but we believe that other oversight mechanisms and methods would have been deployed to redress that.” Mr. Speaker, Sir, it was alleged that the Governor has committed a crime against national law because a report from the Ombudsman implicates the Governor. It is like taking a newspaper report that alleges that somebody committed a crime, and now presenting it before this Senate and saying that a crime has been committed. What I am happy about is that this Senate is comprised of noble men and women, who are intelligent enough to appreciate that a report cannot constitute a crime. The lady who is said to have been defrauded of the land, would have come and taken oath before this Senate saying: “I dealt with Gov. Waititu, he did A, B, C, and D, and I lost my property.” That was not done. You were not even told that the Director of Criminal Investigations (DCI) has commenced any investigations. What you saw was an affidavit. Why would Cecilia be happy to sign an affidavit and not present herself for cross-examination before this Senate, so that this Senate can be satisfied that Gov. Waititu was a beneficiary of a fraud committed against her? What was being hidden? That is a question I would urge this Senate to bear in mind in consideration of this matter. There is the question of conflict of interest. Conflict of interest has to do with what benefits accrued to the Governor personally? This is because, that is the key"
}