Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 976861,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/976861/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 295,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. (Dr.) Kabaka",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13206,
        "legal_name": "Boniface Mutinda Kabaka",
        "slug": "boniface-mutinda-kabaka-2"
    },
    "content": "Thank you very much, Madam Temporary Speaker. I will be very brief. Looking at the clock there, I can see that we have barely 10 minutes, and maybe, there is somebody else to follow. I thank Sen. Farhiya for bringing this important Bill which is long overdue. If this Bill was established at the advent of Independence, we would not be having this problem. We do appreciate that historically, Kenya after attaining Independence, we inherited the system of capitalism through our body organs, including the Judiciary. We do appreciate that at Independence, all the officers of the Judiciary were White men and they perpetuated the doctrine of capitalism. I have read this Bill very well from Clause 1 all the way. In particular, I would say that it terminates at Clause 34 because after that we have Miscellaneous Provisions under Part 5. That is Clause 35 all through to Clause 40. Then, of course, thereunder are the Memoranda of Objects and the Reasons thereof. This Bill is good, only that it needs to be polished in certain aspects. I appreciate that I have 20 minutes; I will go slowly then. I have looked at the objectives of this Bill and they are very clear. It deals with lifestyle audit. Clause 2 on the interpretation of this Bill defines it very clear for everyone to understand what it is talking about. It means – and means is conclusive in law – an investigative audit of a person’s living standards to ascertain consistency with their lawfully obtained or reported income. In short, this Bill entirely deals with the lifestyles of persons. In other words, a person should not be seen to live beyond his or her own means. If your salary is Kshs100,000, then you cannot afford a chopper. If you get a chopper, then the analogy, and it is a very clear decision of the Court of Appeal and even the Supreme Court--- The court has held more than once that if a person is challenged to explain the source of their wealth and is unable to do so, then logically, that person will be deemed to be corrupt. It goes without saying and that is what we are talking about. The other issue that I have seen that needs brushing is jurisdiction. I was very careful looking at the hierarchy or systems of the courts here. Under the Bill, the Mover proposes that the jurisdiction of the court commences with the High Court. However, if you look at Article 162 of the Constitution, it defines the courts. Of course, it bequeaths Parliament certain powers. It says that the superior courts are the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, the High Court, and the courts referred to in Sub-section 2. Article 162 (2) of the Constitution states that- The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor, Senate."
}