Finance Bill cannot become law by lapse of time, says Wetangula

National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetang'ula. [File, Standard]

National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetang'ula has said the Finance Bill 2024 cannot become law through mere elapse of time as several pundits have claimed.

Wetangula in a communication to Members of Parliament on basic applicable procedure and implications of the rejection of the Finance Bill 2024, said it was notable that the house had already passed the Appropriation Bill 2024.

The Speaker informed MPs that the new financial year started Monday with the instruments which authorise withdrawal of funds from the consolidated fund for utilization by the national government being the Appropriation Act which is distinct from the Finance Bill.

“We are guided that the financing gap may be bridged by the reduction of approved expenditure, this may be achieved by enacting a Supplementary Appropriation Bill in accordance with the applicable procedure,” said Wetangula.

Rarieda MP Otiende Amollo in a letter to Wetangula said that he had drafted a Bill to repeal the Finance Act 2024 (currently a Bill), in light of the public rejection of the Bill and the subsequent decision by the president not to assent to it.

Amollo said contrary to the president's Memorandum of Referral suggesting that the Bill be amended and deleted, Article 115 (5) of the Constitution as read with the Standing Orders and as interpreted by various Speakers of Parliament, dictates against this.

He said he had taken this initiative because contrary to the proffered opinion, neither the president nor parliament can withdraw a Bill that has already passed the Third Reading since Standing Order 154(5) specifically expects a vote on the amendment to the Bill and does not contemplate a vote on deletion of the entire Bill

The Rarieda MP said it is inconceivable to amend a Bill to result in nothingness as Article 115(5) specifically expects submission of a Bill to the President after the process of consideration of the President's Memorandum.

Amollo said the entirety of the Standing Orders and Parliamentary Practice as variously reiterated by many Speakers over time, does not contemplate amendments that negate a Bill, or as would result in its complete avoidance. 

“For the foregoing reasons, I believe that the route of repeal on the same day that the Finance Bill would become law pursuant to Article 115 (6), is one that lends itself to reason, logic and the Constitution more than the alternatives proposed,” said Amollo.

Wetangula in his memo said article 115 of the Constitution empowers the president to refer a bill back to parliament for reconsideration, noting that any reservations that the president may have concerning the bill thereafter, parliament is required to consider reservations in the manner provided under the said act.

“Upon receipt of the President’s memorandum, the Speaker is required to refer the memorandum to the Finance and National Planning Committee, I have referred the memorandum to the committee for consideration and reporting to the National Assembly when it next sits,” said Wetangula. 

Wetangula pointed out that  rejection of the Finance Bill 2024 will occasion a financial gap of approximately Sh 300 billion between the expenditure approved by the National Assembly through the appropriation bill 2024 and the projected revenues that may be raised from the existing tax measures.

The Speaker explained that the Budget for any financial year comprises estimates of expenditure for the national government with the approved estimates of expenditure translated into an appropriation bill for consideration and passage by the National Assembly.

“It is not unusual for the President to refer a bill back to the house with reservations recommending its rejection through deletion of all its clauses, the National Assembly has previously received and considered President’s reservations recommending the deletion of all clauses in a bill during the 11th and 12th parliaments,” said Wetangula.

 He said that in particular the house received and considered reservations relating to the Central Bank Amendment Bill (the National Assembly Bill Number 28 of 2014) and the Law of contract Amendment Bill (National Assembly Bill Number 1 of 2019).

The Speaker said that in both instances the house failed to marshal the votes of two thirds of the Members of National Assembly required to veto the President’s recommendations.