PIC: Speaker Cannot Classify NA Records Without Reasons

Independently written and published by Shahbaz Shah Legal Journal.

What the PIC ruled

The Pakistan Information Commission has held that the National Assembly Speaker cannot restrict citizens' right to information merely by declaring records “classified.” A valid classification decision must record reasons showing why the harm expected from disclosure outweighs the public interest.

The Commission was deciding two appeals filed by journalist Saddia Mazhar against the National Assembly Secretariat. The Secretariat relied on the Speaker's ruling dated 4 October 2022, which treated several categories of Assembly material as classified for the purposes of the Right of Access to Information Act, 2017.

The PIC accepted that the Speaker, as head of the National Assembly Secretariat, could exercise the relevant power under section 7(f). It nevertheless found that the power is subject to the conditions imposed by the statute. Because the 2022 ruling did not contain the required harm-versus-public-interest reasons, it could not lawfully classify the disputed records, either prospectively or retrospectively.

Records requested by the journalist

One appeal concerned officers who had joined the National Assembly Secretariat on deputation from January 2018 onwards. The requested information included their parent departments, grades, appointment dates, promotions and records relating to their induction into the Secretariat.

The PIC also rejected objections based on the applicant not providing a copy of her CNIC and not appearing in person. It noted that appointment and promotion notifications already published in the official Gazette, or information otherwise publicly available, could not be withheld on the asserted ground.

Disclosure ordered within ten days

The Commission directed the National Assembly's deputy secretary, or another designated officer, to give the applicant the specific link for information available on the Secretariat's website and provide certified copies of the remaining requested records within ten days of receiving the order.

The ruling does not mean that every National Assembly record is automatically public. It means that a public authority must identify a lawful exception and satisfy its statutory requirements; a bare “classified” label is not enough. The PIC also relied on section 25, under which the 2017 Act prevails over inconsistent provisions in other laws.

The ruling follows a related recent Lahore High Court decision that concluded meeting records cannot be withheld indefinitely once the relevant final decision has been made.

This report is for general information. The official order, current statutory text and any later judicial proceedings should be checked before reliance in a case.