What Kenya’s info policy means for ordinary people

Ever tried to get a record from a government office and been told to come back next week? Then next week came, and the answer was the same. Kenya says it wants to end that.

Kenya has formally published its Access to Information Policy, 2026, a national framework for how citizens get information held by public institutions. Information Cabinet Secretary William Kabogo gazetted it on October 9, 2026, under Gazette Notice No. 15992. Gazetting simply means the policy was officially published in the Kenya Gazette, the government's public record of notices. It is the step that makes the policy official.

What it is meant to do

Kenyans already have this right on paper. Article 35 of the Constitution guarantees every citizen access to information held by the State. In some cases, it also covers information held by other organisations. The 2016 Access to Information Act turned that right into law and put the Commission on Administrative Justice in charge of oversight.

So what does a policy add? Think of the law as the rule and the policy as the plan for following it. The law says you can ask. The policy sets out how offices should make that easy in real life.

A big part of that plan is digitising records. An earlier official statement said the policy would set clear guidelines for moving public records into digital form. Digital records are faster to find and easier to share than paper files in a back room.

The other big idea is proactive disclosure. This means offices publish important information on their own, without waiting for someone to ask. Imagine a county posting its budget, or a ministry posting the winners of a tender. You read it online. You don't have to queue at a records desk.

The policy is also tied to bigger goals. It lines up with a UN target on guaranteeing public access to information. It also draws on Kenya Vision 2030, the country's long-term development plan, which treats open information and data as a way to get citizens involved in governance.

Who may benefit

Anyone who deals with public offices could gain. Here are a few everyday examples of how that might look:

A farmer wants to know how a subsidy was shared out in their area.
A parent wants to see how money meant for the local school was spent.
A small business owner wants to understand why a public tender went to another company.
A journalist or community group wants to follow a road project from budget to completion.

In each case, the person is asking a simple question about public money or public services. Clear, open records mean they don't need a connection, a favour or a bribe to get an answer. That matters most for people with the least time and money to keep chasing an office.

Public officers could benefit too. Clear guidelines on what to share, and how, give a clerk or an office head something to follow. That is better than guessing and saying no to be safe.

The questions that remain

The hard part is enforcement. A policy only counts if offices change how they behave.

Reports have raised concerns that some public institutions use data protection rules to refuse people access to records. Protecting personal data is important, and it is a legitimate reason to withhold some information. But it should not become an easy excuse to keep public information locked away. The new policy is meant to respond to that concern. People will be watching to see whether it does.

The law already has real teeth. Section 18 of the Access to Information Act sets out offences for blocking, altering or erasing records. The Commission on Administrative Justice can also order access when the right is denied. Even so, years of concern about whether public offices follow these rules show that written powers do not always become daily practice.

Institutions are also expected to appoint officers to handle information requests. It is not yet clear how many have done so, or how well those officers are trained and supported. A request is only as useful as the person who answers it.