A Nairobi court has ruled that every decision by the Ombudsman has a force of law as a High Court determination.
The Constitutional and Human Rights Division of the High Court sitting in Milimani on Thursday ruled that anybody bearing the final determination of the Commission on Administrative Justice can now approach the court to have it enforced.
The judgement affirms the powers accorded to the commission under the Access to Information Act, 2016.
The import of the judgment is that anybody who declines to honour the orders and determination of the commission can be cited for contempt and jailed.
The decision of the body, however, acquires such weight of law after the decree-holder files it in Court for enforcement.
The High Court can find one in Contempt and jail or fine them for defying it.
The court's pronouncement is a result of a case in which Paragon Electronics Limited moved to court to have an order of the Commission be adopted by the court after one Njeri Kariuki, an Arbitrator, failed to comply with the Commission's decision.
The company, through its advocates, had made a request for information to Kariuki on November 11, 2021, under the Act.
The entity wanted the arbitrator to provide it with timesheets that show proof of time spent during the arbitration proceedings between Yusuf Sharafally and Amana Yusuf Sharafally, and itself.
It also wanted Kariuki to supply it with invoices providing a breakdown of services provided or a justification of arbitration fee of Sh972,000; and ETR receipts to enable their client to offset their own Value Added Tax liabilities.
Kariuki, however, in November 2021 letter denied the information request.
She indicated that the requester would only be allowed to peruse the copies of the timesheets in her office without the right to obtain copies and refused to issue ETR receipts for payments which were already made to her.
The company resorted to invoking the 2016 law in demanding the information afresh.
Kariuki merely acknowledged their letter without providing the requested information, prompting the law firm to make an application for review of Kariukis's action to the office of the Ombudsman.
The company then complained to the commission on December 10 last year, seeking its help.
The Commission ordered Kariuki in January this year to provide the needed information but she failed.
Pragon Limited to move to court to have the Commission's orders adopted as orders of the court.
In his judgment, judge Antony Mrima declared that the orders of the commission have the same force of law as the orders of the court.
