LEGISLATION | Speaker clears proposed laws for debate
Lawmakers differ over whether to have the Bill's publication period shortened from 14 to 12 days
MPs
yesterday reacted coldly to the Marriage Bill, which
was introduced to the House for the first formal reading, promising a
lively debate likely to divide Parliament along gender lines. Even
before the debate begins on the Marriage Bill, signs in the National
Assembly are that it will be one of those that inspire passionate
statements and the formation of bonds across the political leanings.
Before the Bill was introduced in the House for the formal First
Reading yesterday, it was met with a hostile reception by most male MPs,
whose words and actions suggested a boisterous debate when the time
comes.
Justice and Legal Affairs Committee chairman Samuel
Chepkonga had introduced the proposal to have the Bill's publication
period shortened from 14 to 12 days.
But it soon became apparent
that most of the male MPs were so apprehensive about the proposed
legislation that they were not willing to make any concessions for it
despite the fact that many of them had only read about it in the media
and had not had time to look at the proposed law itself.
Kitutu
Chache North MP Jimmy Angwenyi fired the first salvo, saying that
although the Marriage Bill and the Election Finance Campaign Bill, which
was also introduced, were important, there was no need to rush them.
MPs Mwinga Gunga (Kaloleni) and George Ogalo (Rangwe) followed, saying
from the onset that they were opposed to the request to reduce the
publication period.
“People are getting married and there is no way the two days will change
how people marry,“ said Mr Ogalo.
Muhoroni MP James Oyoo and
his Msambweni counterpart Abdalla Mwashetani agreed with their
colleagues that there was no need to hurry the two Bills.
Igembe
Central legislator Kubai Iringo argued the Bill was too weighty to be
rushed through the House, saying hurrying it would not mean people would
stop getting married.
Publication period But nominated MP Amina
Abdalla informed her colleagues that the idea behind shortening the
publication period was for practical reasons.
Given that the
Bill was published on June 20, she said, shortening the publication
period made it possible for it to be formally introduced yesterday.
Mr Chepkonga said formally introducing the Bill in the House made work
easier for the committee as it would scrutinise the proposed law, take
views and take it back for debate after the recess in August.
“Members shouldn't discuss the Bill now,“ he said.
Majority Leader Aden Duale said the House must eventually pass laws on campaign financing and marriage.
He said the Bill would be handled by the committee and MPs would get the chance to make amendments.
“Members only read what was in the media. They haven’t read the Bill itself,” he said.
Migori
Women Representative Dennitah Ghati caused a stir when she said: “If
you look at the male members even before it has come to the floor, they
really need to be investigated.” Githunguri’s Njoroge Baiya said the
goal of reducing the maturation period was to make it easier for the
House to comply with constitutional requirements. “To say here that
there is no urgency is to miss the point.
The Constitution actually says that we should have passed these Bills by last December,” he said.
When the matter was put to the verbal vote, it was not clear who had out-shouted the other.
Speaker Justin Muturi ruled that those in favour had won. The opposers failed to call for a physical vote and the Bills were
No comments:
Post a Comment