Kenya Unveils New Rules on Government Records, Public Spending and Whistleblower Protection

The Kenyan government has introduced a new policy aimed at improving public access to official records, strengthening accountability in public institutions and protecting people who report suspected wrongdoing.

The Access to Information Policy, 2026, was gazetted on October 9, 2026. It seeks to address persistent challenges that have made it difficult for citizens to obtain government information, including bureaucratic delays, poor records management and limited disclosure of information held by public bodies.

The framework could help Kenyans seeking details about public expenditure, government decisions, development projects and the implementation of public programmes.

Information, Communications and the Digital Economy Cabinet Secretary William Kabogo said the policy responds to Kenya’s constitutional and legal obligations while supporting the country’s development agenda.

The government also links the framework to Kenya Vision 2030, which recognises access to information as an important tool for encouraging public participation in national development.

According to the policy, transparency is essential to enabling citizens to participate meaningfully in governance, assess government performance and hold public institutions accountable for their decisions.

The framework further aligns with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, which recognise access to information as an important element of freedom of expression, the rule of law and public trust in institutions.

Public institutions expected to disclose information proactively

One of the key measures in the policy is the expectation that public institutions will publish information of public interest without waiting for citizens to submit formal requests.

This approach could make it easier for Kenyans to find information about government activities and decisions without having to visit multiple offices or navigate lengthy administrative procedures.

The policy also calls for information to be provided in accessible formats, taking into account language needs and the circumstances of persons living with disabilities.

Depending on the local context, information should be available in an official language or an appropriate common local language or dialect.

These provisions are intended to widen access beyond people who can easily navigate government offices, read complex documents or use conventional digital platforms.

Public institutions are also expected to establish procedures for receiving and processing information requests and communicate their decisions within the timelines prescribed by law.

Where an institution has regional offices, departments or semi-autonomous units, an Information Access Officer may delegate relevant responsibilities to officers working in those units.

The arrangement is intended to make the handling of requests more efficient and ensure that information can be obtained from the appropriate department.

Better records management could reduce delays

The policy identifies records management as another important area requiring improvement.

Government offices are expected to maintain accurate, reliable and accessible records so that information can be retrieved when requested.

Technology is also expected to play a role in improving how public records are stored, organised and accessed.

Poor record-keeping can make it difficult for officials to respond to requests, establish how decisions were reached or provide reliable information about the implementation of public projects.

Improved systems could therefore help citizens, journalists, researchers and civil society organisations obtain documents needed to investigate public spending and assess whether government programmes are delivering their intended results.

However, the policy’s success will depend on whether institutions have adequate staff, functioning information systems and clear procedures for handling requests.

New policy addresses protection of whistleblowers

The framework also proposes safeguards for people who disclose official wrongdoing in the public interest.

These measures seek to protect whistleblowers against victimisation, discrimination, punishment and dismissal, while also addressing the need to protect their identities.

Such safeguards could encourage people with credible information about suspected malpractice to report it without fearing retaliation.

The protection of whistleblowers is particularly important where information about possible wrongdoing is held within an institution and may not be readily available to the public.

Nevertheless, the practical value of these safeguards will depend on how they are implemented and enforced, as well as the legal protections available in individual cases.

Access to government information will not be unlimited

Although the policy seeks to improve transparency, it does not require the government to release every document to the public.

Certain information may still be withheld where disclosure would violate lawful restrictions. These may include protections relating to national security, personal privacy, commercial interests and particular legal proceedings.

The distinction means that citizens will continue to exercise their right of access within the limits established by the law.

Where an information request is denied, the person seeking the records should be informed of the decision and the applicable timelines for seeking a review.

Kenyans who believe their requests have been unfairly rejected can pursue established review and complaints mechanisms, including those handled by the Commission on Administrative Justice, commonly known as the Office of the Ombudsman.

The commission plays a role in overseeing compliance with access-to-information obligations and addressing complaints concerning the handling of requests.

The Access to Information Act remains the legal foundation

Kenya’s Access to Information Act, 2016, provides the statutory framework through which citizens exercise their right to obtain information held by public entities and, in specified circumstances, private bodies.

The new policy is intended to provide a broader framework for implementing those existing legal obligations across relevant institutions.

Its publication comes amid longstanding concerns about inconsistent disclosure practices, inadequate resources, weak records management and limited public awareness of the right to information.

The policy therefore seeks to improve not only the availability of records but also the systems institutions use to receive requests, make decisions and report on their compliance.

Public institutions are required to submit annual access-to-information reports to the Office of the Ombudsman at the end of each financial year on June 30. These reports are compiled from quarterly reports prepared during the financial year.

The commission has also warned against submitting manipulated or false information in compliance reports, noting that it can initiate appropriate action against a reporting institution or its chief executive where the law permits.

Reporting requirements are intended to help monitor whether institutions are meeting their obligations and identify areas where implementation needs improvement.

What the policy could mean for ordinary Kenyans

If implemented effectively, the framework could give citizens a more practical way to exercise their constitutional right to information.

Journalists could use official records to investigate public expenditure and government decisions. Researchers and civil society organisations could obtain documents to support their work, while ordinary citizens could seek information about public programmes and administrative decisions affecting their communities.

Greater access could also help people understand how public resources are allocated and whether government commitments are being fulfilled.

However, gazetting a policy does not automatically guarantee that information requests will be answered promptly or that every institution will comply fully with its obligations.

The impact will depend on whether public bodies establish workable procedures, maintain accurate records, protect people who report wrongdoing and respond to requests within the timelines set by law.

For Kenyans, the central issue will be whether the new framework translates the right to information into a more accessible and dependable service.

The policy sets out the government’s intended approach, but its real test will be whether citizens can obtain the public records they need without unnecessary delays or administrative obstacles.

Werunga feedback-opera-news-app@opera.com