Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Raila Odinga: Governors serve the counties, and they can serve two terms. In Parliament, we did an amendment so that any MP who serves two terms is automatically entitled to a pension. Why can we not do the same thing to the governors? A governor who has served two...

73,539 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce •via X (Twitter)

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

President Emmerson Mnangagwa's spokesman George Charamba, who is also the Deputy Chief Secretary, Presidential Communications in the Office of the President and Cabinet, has provoked a storm of controversy by claiming that parliament trumps a national referendum on constitutional amendment issues currently being debated through a legislative public consultation process. Mnangagwa and his party are using parliament to amend the constitution to extend his rule to 2030 and introduce a raft of other significant changes without going through a referendum, which civil society and opposition activists insist is a requirement in terms of the constitution. The 2013 constitution mandates that any extension of presidential term limits or removal of two five-year term limits must be approved by voters through a referendum. Critics say extending terms from five to seven years, or changing the electoral system constitutes a major subversion of this clause, requiring a referendum. However, Mnangagwa and his allies say a referendum is not needed as they are not removing term limits, but elongating the term lengths and changing the electoral cycle. Zanu PF says the amendment is not a change to the limit of two terms, but rather the length of each term (five to seven years), meaning a referendum is not constitutionally mandated. They say the amendments are meant to ensure political stability and remove "election mode toxicity," disrupting peace, governance and development. The debate centres over holding a referendum on the proposed amendments, specifically Constitution Amendment Bill No.3, which proposes extending Mnangagwa's tenure by two years andpresidential and parliamentary terms from five to seven years as well as changing the presidential election system from direct voting through popular franchise to indirect selection via parliament. The ruling Zanu PF party controls parliament, leading to calls for a popular referendum to approve these significant changes, which critics argue violate the 2013 constitution's democratic intent. Charamba said: “Those who were old enough to participate and follow proceedings of 2013 will know that even after the referendum, that outcome of the referendum still had to be processed through Parliament. What that means is that, a referendum does not usurp the power of Parliament. It simply provides a popular basis for legislative action. Otherwise, at law, the body which is recognized as responsible for any changes, be they at the level of the primary law or at the level of subsidiary laws, is Parliament. Right? So, really, you can't place the referendum in apposition to Parliament. You can't. You just cannot because the referendum does not give you a result that writes the constitution. It is parliament which is mandated to do so in terms of our law. So, really, there shouldn't be any argument at all in respect of that matter. Right?.”

TheNewsHawks

16,586 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

This is supposed to be an opposition Member of Parliament in Zimbabwe called Samantha Mureyani from Manicaland. This Member of Parliament spoke in Zimbabwe’s Parliament today. Despite being an opposition MP, she stated that she supports Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 sponsored by the ruling ZANUPF. She specifically spoke about her support for President Emmerson Mnangagwa remaining in office for an additional two years beyond the current constitutional term limit of 10 years. She also expressed support for the idea of extending presidential terms to seven years. This is the quality of some of the MPs sitting in Zimbabwe’s Parliament today. As I have said before, this is not just a Zimbabwean crisis or a Zimbabwean story. It is a regional story. When the political fallout from these developments begins to unfold and the economy deteriorates even further, it is countries such as South Africa and Botswana that will bear the brunt of increased migration pressures from Zimbabwe. That is what unfolded in Zimbabwe’s Parliament today. This MP was brought into Parliament by the charlatan-imposed opposition parliamentary leader, Sengezo Tshabangu, who captured the CCC party, taking advantage of the fact that it did not have a constitution or leadership structures. He falsely claimed to be the party’s Secretary-General, which he was not, and exploited the vacuum created by the absence of formal structures and leadership.

Hopewell Chin’ono

54,768 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

[WATCH] THE SECTION 89 MATTER On the Section 89 matter now before Parliament, so that the public is not misled by those who would dramatise an ordinary constitutional process. The ANC’s posture on the Section 89 Matter is one of procedural neutrality: the process is proceeding in an orderly manner under the binding Constitutional Court judgment, with the Committee’s draft Terms of Reference open for party submissions until Friday 10 July and the work of Parliament continues, it must not be rushed but deliberated carefully. The ANC will participate, if at all, only as amicus curiae, confined to parliamentary process and sequencing, because our duty is to defend the integrity of a constitutional process, not to argue any party’s merits. On the Terms of Reference, the ANC will not support the admissibility of untested hearsay: an inquiry of this gravity demands evidence under oath, properly tested, perjury on those who will think parliament is a playground to mislead or tell plain lies must also be applied. The question before parliament is whether the president committed high crimes and high misdemeanors and did so alive to it, knowingly. That is what parliament is to test but first, is the Panel Report itself a bona fide instrument, did it find correctly that high crimes and high misdemeanors occurred on the part of the president. What we know is that the Public Protector has said no, the SARB has said not so. Then, should parliament proceed now or wait till September court case? We think it is wise and economical to wait because September court gives parliament itself finality and a foundation. That is it. #ANCMediaBriefing #RegisterToVoteANC #YearOfDecisiveAction

ANC SECRETARY GENERAL | Fikile Mbalula

12,372 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce