Paul Otiende Amollo

All parliamentary appearances

Entries 631 to 640 of 660.

• 21 Mar 2018 in National Assembly: Clause 21 of this Bill seeks to do something unconstitutional. It seeks to create additional penalty in terms of any offense in any other law. Then it purports that under this Bill, in addition The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposes only. Acertified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor. view
• 21 Mar 2018 in National Assembly: to any punishment in any other law, you can also be punished additionally. That is what we call double jeopardy in law. It is unconstitutional and offends Article 50(2) (o). view
• 21 Mar 2018 in National Assembly: Clause 31 of this Bill does something strange. It allows anybody who feels offended to appeal either to the High Court or to the Court of Appeal. There are three things about that. First of all, it is not necessary to have such provisions in this Bill because they are already in the Constitution. Secondly, it excludes what usually is the avenue for challenge, that is, what we call judicial review, not appeal. Judicial review is preserved by Article 50(2) (q). More importantly, it strangely seeks to allow somebody to appeal from a magistrate’s court to the Court of Appeal, ... view
• 21 Mar 2018 in National Assembly: With those specific areas of unconstitutionality, I wish to observe that looking at the definition of ‘computer system’, looking at the object in Clause 3(a) and looking at the offence created in Clause 4(1), those of us who belong to the NASA Coalition complained in the Supreme Court on 8th of August and the Supreme Court directed that the servers of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) be opened, but the IEBC refused to open them. We were, however, able to access the servers of the IEBC and we published the results. If this Bill was law, we would ... view
• 21 Mar 2018 in National Assembly: It is also to be noted that there is the question of penalties. This Bill is so heavy on penalties. It creates 17 offences. All those offenses are the heaviest I have ever seen in any legislation. The jail term ranges from three to 25 years. Fines range from Kshs5 million to Kshs25 million. That does not exist anywhere. As a lawyer who focuses mostly on rights, to create severe penalties does not usually deter people from that offence. It will only result in circumvention of those offences. Criminal jurisdiction suggests that if you want to achieve deterrence, you create ... view
• 21 Mar 2018 in National Assembly: The offence of cyber stalking and cyber bullying in Clause 16 is very unclear. In its current form, unless properly defined, it could include anything including legitimate criticism. If somebody contacts you continuously, which could be two or three times, then that could amount to cyber bullying. I do not even know how your constituents who call you twice or three times will contact you because they will be committing a criminal offence. Unless properly redefined, Clause 16 is dangerous. view
• 21 Mar 2018 in National Assembly: For those reasons in its current state, I oppose this Bill. It is important to note two things. One, that the fact that it has been enacted elsewhere, including in the United States, does not require us to enact it because they do not have a Constitution such as ours. The Kenyan Constitution is only like the Kenyan Constitution and no other. Secondly, in the past history, we The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposes only. Acertified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor. view
• 21 Mar 2018 in National Assembly: had rushed like other countries, led by the US, to pass similar legislation, especially the Prevention of Terrorism Act. All the countries that passed that legislation later ended up in problems. In this country, we had to repeal it. My caution is, while the Bill is well intended, unless it is properly looked into; it is one that would create more harm than good. Lastly, I have heard many Members talk about cyber bullying and people accessing their phones and sending all sorts of messages. It will interest Members to know that all those issues that appear to concern us ... view
• 21 Mar 2018 in National Assembly: With that, I oppose for now. view
• 21 Mar 2018 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, I support this Motion with a small rider. First, it should apply nationally. The police are guided by the National Police Service Commission (NPSC) so it is national. The hardship of the police knows not the hardship areas only. k Second, the NPSC has failed and that is why this Motion has been tabled. It is their duty to negotiate with the SRC for the salaries in terms of both the hardship allowance and proper housing. May this Motion be forwarded to them so that they can properly undertake their duty and wake up from their ... view