The High Court has reiterated the independence of the Parliamentary Service Commission (PSC), stating that it remains distinct from Parliament and cannot be compelled to produce documents that are not legally under its custody.
In its observations, the court noted that the National Assembly’s role is limited to receiving nominees for public appointments, and it is not mandated to handle or retain documents beyond that scope. As such, petitioners seeking certain records should have followed the legal pathway under Article 35 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to access information.
The bench highlighted that the petitioners had made a request for information on May 9 but proceeded to file the petition on May 13 before receiving any official response. The court termed the action premature and out of sync with the timelines stipulated in the Access to Information Act.
“An aggrieved party must first move the Commission on Administrative Justice for a review or wait 30 days where there is no decision. The 24-hour window the petitioners relied on does not align with Sections 9 and 14 of the Act,” the court stated, adding that the matter was already set for hearing on June 23.
Additionally, the court observed that the Office of the Attorney General does not play any role in the recruitment of IEBC commissioners. It therefore cannot be compelled to provide documents that are not legally expected to be in its possession a fact the petitioners failed to demonstrate.
The judges also emphasized that while the right to access information is constitutionally protected, it is not absolute and may be reasonably limited under certain circumstances.
The ruling offers clarity on the procedural expectations for obtaining public records and underscores the importance of adhering to statutory timelines before moving to court
