Mutula Kilonzo Jnr

All parliamentary appearances

Entries 2371 to 2380 of 3800.

• 1 Aug 2018 in Senate: Yes, I have requested for your leave to move the Motion in an amended form. view
• 1 Aug 2018 in Senate: First, may I begin by mentioning--- view
• 1 Aug 2018 in Senate: First, may I begin by mentioning--- view
• 1 Aug 2018 in Senate: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, when I was younger, I used to represent Sen. Moi. During that time, he was in good stead with the law. view
• 1 Aug 2018 in Senate: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, when I was younger, I used to represent Sen. Moi. During that time, he was in good stead with the law. view
• 1 Aug 2018 in Senate: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, for this particular point, he is misadvised legally. When I used to advise him, he would not have raised this point, and I will elaborate. In a matter like this, Sen. Moi should have disclosed his interest. What is Sen. Moi’s interest? Is he a business partner of Mr. Patel or any of the accused? view
• 1 Aug 2018 in Senate: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, for this particular point, he is misadvised legally. When I used to advise him, he would not have raised this point, and I will elaborate. In a matter like this, Sen. Moi should have disclosed his interest. What is Sen. Moi’s interest? Is he a business partner of Mr. Patel or any of the accused? view
• 1 Aug 2018 in Senate: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, that makes my life easy. Sen. Moi is raising a point of order for the sake of it. If Sen. Moi bothered to read the Standing Orders all the way to Standing Order 92 (4), it says:- “A senator alleging a matter is sub judice shall provide evidence to show that paragraphs (2) and (3) are applicable.” First and foremost, the sub judice objection is premature because he has not laid a basis. So, I am responding to something that has no basis. Two, the accused person who spent three days in Naivasha was seated here. ... view
• 1 Aug 2018 in Senate: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, that makes my life easy. Sen. Moi is raising a point of order for the sake of it. If Sen. Moi bothered to read the Standing Orders all the way to Standing Order 92 (4), it says:- “A senator alleging a matter is sub judice shall provide evidence to show that paragraphs (2) and (3) are applicable.” First and foremost, the sub judice objection is premature because he has not laid a basis. So, I am responding to something that has no basis. Two, the accused person who spent three days in Naivasha was seated here. ... view
• 1 Aug 2018 in Senate: It is not sub judice to the extent that we warned ourselves, as a Committee, in the Report. Sen. Moi should have read the caveat which we put in the Report that we never requested for a statement from any of the witnesses or the DPP. When he showed up here, we chased everybody and sat with him in camera, because we were protecting the fair rights of the accused persons. The person who should come and say that the discussion and report--- view