Abdikadir Mohammed

All parliamentary appearances

Entries 701 to 710 of 1092.

• 10 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: (b) in the definition of the expression “designated non-financial businesses or professions”, by— view
• 10 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move:- THAT, Clause 3 of the Bill be amended— (a) by deleting the expression “which has or is likely to have the effect of” appearing immediately after paragraph (b) and substituting therefor the expression “whose effect is to”; (b) in subparagraph (i), by— (i) deleting the word “concealing” and substituting therefor the word “conceal”; (ii) deleting the word “disguising” and substituting therefor the word “disguise”; (c) in subparagraph (ii), by— (i) deleting the word “enabling” and substituting therefor the word “enable”; (ii) deleting the word “assisting” and substituting therefor the word “assist”; ... view
• 10 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: Mr. Temporary Deputy Chairman, Sir, I beg to move:- THAT, Clause 4 of the Bill be deleted. view
• 10 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: Mr. Temporary Deputy Chairman, Sir, the reason for the deletion is that Clause 4 deals with exactly what Clause 3 deals with. It is not even understandable. That clause says:- “A person who knows or ought reasonably to have known that another person has obtained the proceeds of crime, and who enters into any agreement with anyone or engages in any arrangement or transaction whereby---” It is very superfluous. In any event, it deals exactly with the same issues as Clause 3. “A person who knows or who ought reasonably to have known that property is or forms part of ... view
• 10 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: Mr. Temporary Deputy Chairman, Sir, finally, “property” is defined in the Act. It is defined not only as real property, but as everything else that the Act deals with. In other words, all proceeds of crime or money-laundering are property as per the definition in Clause 2. So, I propose the amendment as it appears on the Order Paper. view
• 10 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: Mr. Temporary Deputy Chairman, Sir, I beg to move:- THAT, Clause 17 of the Bill be amended by deleting Subclause (4) and substituting therefor the following new Subclause— “(4) A person who contravenes the provisions of Section 13(3) shall, on conviction, be liable to a fine which shall not be more than 10 per cent of the amount of the monetary instruments involved in the offence.” view
• 10 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: Mr. Temporary Deputy Chairman, Sir, under Clause 17, we did agree with the Minister that the issue here is the reporting of the offence. There is an offence under that Clause where if you were to go across the national border with money or property in form of cheques and so on, you ought to report. In the event that you do not report, you are guilty of an offence. It is a reporting offence. That offence is created under Clause 13(3) which reads:- “A person who willfully fails to report the conveyance of monetary instruments into or out of ... view
• 10 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: Mr. Temporary Deputy Chairman, Sir, I need to point out that Clause 17 deals with several offences and we are only interested in the reporting offence. Mr. Temporary Deputy Chairman, Sir, if you look at Clause 17(2), it says:- “A person who contravenes any part of the provisions of sections 6, 9, 13 (3) or 14---“ We are only interested in Clause 13(3) and we are interested in the punishment under Clause 13 (3): That, if you contravene a reporting offence, you ought to be fined 10 per cent of the funds you are carrying. The assumption being that you ... view
• 10 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: Thank you, Mr. Temporary Deputy Chairman, Sir. Let me say that Clause 13(3) creates an offence called a “reporting offence”. Clause 13(2) gives the punishment for several offences. We are interested in Clause 17(2) in amending Clause 13(3). In other words, delete Clause 13(3) as indicated in Clause 17(2). It will read as follows:- Clause 13(3) says:- “A person who willfully fails to report the conveyance of monetary instruments into or out of Kenya, or materially misrepresents the amount of monetary instruments reported in accordance with the requirements of Subsection (1) commits an offence.” Clause 17(2) says: “A person who ... view
• 10 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: Mr. Temporary Deputy Chairman, Sir, I beg to move: THAT, Clause 19 be amended in Sub-Clause (4), by deleting the proviso appearing immediately after the expression “breach of Subsection (2)”. Mr. Temporary Deputy Chairman, I propose the deletion of that proviso because it is word for word almost, a repetition of clause 134 of the Evidence Act. There is no need of repeating laws once they are in the books. Indeed, the clause is more appropriate in that Act, than in this Bill. view