In Schreiber v ANC, Leon Schreiber, a member of the National Assembly representing the DA, requested access to information from the ANC on their National Cadre Deployment Committee’s activities. The ANC refused the request, leading Schreiber and the DA to approach the court for relief. The court examined whether the DA had the right to request the documents under PAIA and whether Schreiber adequately demonstrated that the information was necessary to exercise or protect a particular right.
Who should care about this judgment and why?
- Private bodies because you should provide access to information to individuals who request it.
- The government and anyone making public appointments, because you might have to grant access to your records.
- Data subjects because you should know about your right to request access to records in terms of PAIA.
What could you do about it?
- Read the full judgment by downloading it.
- Access other relevant PAIA judgments by joining the Michalsons Access to Information programme.
Our insights on the judgment
This judgment shows that everyone should have access to important information, especially information on how the government makes its decisions. Even though the DA didn’t follow all the proper procedural steps, the court still made sure that the person who needed the information could get it. This decision highlights the importance of ensuring governments are open and accountable to the people they serve.
Digest
Schreiber sought access to information from ANC regarding its National Cadre Deployment Committee’s activities. The DA, alongside Schreiber, requested access to that information. The ANC refused the request, prompting legal action.
Upon review, the court found that while Schreiber had standing to bring the application, the DA did not meet the necessary requirements under PAIA to be considered a requester. Thus, its involvement in the case did not affect the outcome. The court also allowed a supplementary affidavit from the applicants.
The court narrowed the issues to two main points:
- Whether the DA had the right to request the documents under PAIA, and
- Whether Schreiber demonstrated that the information was needed to exercise or protect a particular right.
Regarding the first issue, the court ruled that the DA had failed to follow the prerequisites outlined in PAIA, and thus couldn’t rely on the Act’s provisions. However, Schreiber’s right to access the information remained valid.
On the second issue, the court considered Schreiber’s arguments about the necessity of the information for legislative purposes, parliamentary oversight, and potential litigation. It found that Schreiber sufficiently demonstrated the need for the information, especially regarding legislative and oversight purposes.
The court’s decision
The court decided that Schreiber had standing to request the information, although the DA could not be considered a requester in terms of PAIA. The court ruled in favour of Schreiber, finding that he adequately demonstrated the need for the information for legislative and oversight purposes. As a result, the court ordered the ANC to provide the requested information to Schreiber.
The Constitutional Court denied the ANC leave to appeal.
Order
The Court ordered the ANC to:
- provide the requested information within five court days, and
- bear the costs of the application.
Details of Schreiber v ANC
- Universal citation: [2023] ZAGPJHC 78
- Case number: 2021/26339
- Full name: Schreiber and Another v African National Congress
Please note: This judgment summary is not intended for a general audience. It is specifically drafted for the members of the Michalsons Access to Information programme.
