The Commission on Administrative Justice has given the Homa Bay County Government and County Assembly 21 days to release records on the construction of the new county headquarters, warning that failure to comply could lead to recommendations for criminal prosecution.
The orders, delivered on October 8, 2026, require the County Secretary and the Clerk of the County Assembly to facilitate access to the requested records within 21 days of the decision.
The Commission acted following applications for review filed by Katiba Institute after the two institutions failed to provide information requested on March 12, 2025, concerning the approval, financing and implementation of the headquarters project.
Katiba Institute sought records showing how the project was approved, its financing arrangements and the financial obligations arising from the agreement with the County Pension Fund (CPF).
The County Government was asked to provide minutes of the County Executive Committee meeting at which the construction was approved, County Assembly authorisations, agreements with CPF and approvals from the National Government for the lease-to-own financing model.
It must also disclose reports detailing the project's financial obligations, including contingent liabilities, and documents showing its current implementation status.
The County Assembly was asked to provide certified Hansard reports of proceedings concerning approval of the headquarters and the CPF agreement, committee minutes, documents submitted by the County Executive, financial and implementation reports, and any county laws forming the legal basis for the project.
During the review process, the County Assembly failed to respond to the Commission's notice or submit the requested institutional report.
The County Government requested an additional month to compile the documents, which the Commission granted. However, it did not provide the requested information or submit a substantive response after the extended period expired.
The Commission consequently proceeded to determine the applications based on the information available to it.
In its findings, the Commission held that both institutions are public entities required to provide access to information in their possession or under their control. It further determined that the requested records concern the use of public resources and fall within the categories of information subject to disclosure under Section 5 of the Access to Information Act, 2016.
The Commission also ruled that the possibility of some records containing legally exempt information did not justify withholding entire documents. It directed both institutions to redact information protected under Section 6 of the Act and release the remaining portions where they could reasonably be separated.
It further determined that Section 13 of the County Assemblies Powers and Privileges Act, 2017, could not be relied upon to withhold the County Assembly's proceedings records in their entirety.
If the officials fail to comply with the orders within the stipulated 21 days, the Commission said it would recommend criminal prosecution against the County Secretary and the Clerk of the County Assembly under Section 28 of the Access to Information Act, 2016.
The disclosure is intended to strengthen public oversight by enabling residents to scrutinise the project's approvals, financing commitments and implementation.
