Iraq’s Right to Access Information Law: Outlook for 2026

5 min 18 sec January 16, 2026 (Edited)

Iraq’s proposed Law on the Right to Access Information represents a significant governance reform currently on the legislative agenda. Although momentum built in 2024 and 2025 through parliamentary readings and intensified advocacy, the law has not yet entered into force. The law is designed to guarantee the public’s right to obtain information held by public bodies, establish institutional mechanisms to process requests, and balance disclosure against narrowly tailored exemptions. Against a backdrop of broader legal and political change, including heightened online content regulation and reforms in personal status law, codifying a functional right of access to information in 2026 will be both more urgent and more complex.

Current Status and Trajectory

Parliament advanced the draft law through committee review and readings in 2024 amid calls from media and civil society for a credible access framework. Key provisions were reportedly narrowed during deliberations. The latest draft is expected to align with constitutional guarantees and international standards on freedom of information, due process and anti-corruption. As of early 2026, the law had not been published and remains politically salient.

Core Architecture of the Draft Law

The structure set out in the draft reflects global best practice in several respects and would mark a significant step change if enacted and implemented faithfully:

• Scope and standing: Iraqi citizens would enjoy a general right to request and obtain information from public authorities. Foreign residents with a legitimate interest may also submit requests, subject to reciprocity. This broad standing is critical to ensuring the law serves the public interest, not only accredited journalists or non-governmental organisations.
• Institutional anchor: The draft envisages an Information Department within the Iraqi High Commission for Human Rights to oversee the regime. Its mandate would include standard setting, training public officials, coordinating across ministries, maintaining registers, issuing annual reports and ensuring quality and timeliness in handling requests.
• Procedures and timelines: Requests would be filed on a standardised form and logged in a dedicated register.  A decision would be issued within five working days, with provision of information within 15 days, extendable in limited, reasoned circumstances. Urgent matters—such as risks to life or liberty—would be prioritised for accelerated disclosure within three days.
• Review and redress: A specialised committee within each ministry would adjudicate objections to denials or partial disclosures, on the record, within a prescribed period. Judicial review should remain available to secure compliance and develop doctrine.
• Exemptions: Carve-outs in the draft cover national security and defence, international correspondence, deliberative government processes, classified and confidential material, personal privacy, trade secrets and other protected commercial information, and materials linked to ongoing criminal or administrative investigations. Properly construed, these exemptions ought to be interpreted narrowly, subject to severability, and complemented by a public interest override and mandatory harm tests.

How the Draft Would Work in Practice

If enacted in its current form, a requester —  whether journalist, researcher or citizen — would be able to file a simple form with a ministry or agency. The authority would be required to log the request, issue a prompt decision and, if approving, provide the information within the statutory deadline, subject only to narrow and justifiable extensions. A refusal would trigger a right to a reasoned explanation referencing specific exemptions, partial release of segregable material and notification of review rights. The ministry-level committee would operate on the record, with timelines designed to prevent constructive denials. The Information Department would monitor compliance, publish annual statistics on requests, refusals and timelines, and recommend systemic improvements.

Outlook for 2026

In 2026, the law’s practical effects are expected to become visible as authorities move from formal adoption to full implementation. The following developments are anticipated:

Institutional setup and capacity building: The Information Department within the High Commission for Human Rights is expected to become fully operational. Its role in training government employees and civil society groups will be central to consistent handling of information requests. Standard operating procedures, forms and internal guidance will likely be refined to meet the five-day decision period and the 15-day provision period (with limited extension), including protocols for urgent cases where disclosure within three days is required.

Harmonised procedures across ministries: Ministries and entities not affiliated with a ministry are expected to align their internal processes with the law’s timelines and record-keeping obligations, including special registers for requests and standardised receipts. Authorities will likely designate and train focal points to reduce rejection by silence and to prevent inconsistent interpretations of exemptions.

Specialised objections committees: The specialised committees in each ministry or entity are expected to begin producing a body of administrative practice on objections to rejections. While these committee assessments are not judicial precedent, they can create workable standards for applying exemptions, handling partial disclosure, and using redaction to balance the right to know with confidentiality and national security.

Disclosure and publication practices: Although the law focuses on request-based access, authorities are expected to improve proactive publication of non-sensitive information (such as organisational structures, budgets and policies). The Information Department’s annual reports to the Council of Ministers, and their publication in the media, should set expectations for minimum disclosure practices and measurable compliance indicators.

Refinement of exemption use: The exemptions for national security and defence, international communications, confidential documents, government deliberations, personal data and commercial secrets will likely be tested in practice. Authorities are expected to move toward narrower, evidence‑based application of exemptions, with greater use of partial disclosure and redaction, rather than blanket refusals.

Interface with privacy and confidentiality: The protection of personal information and commercially sensitive material will require clearer internal guidance on redaction, consent mechanisms and handling of mixed files that contain both disclosable and exempt material. Authorities will likely develop templates and checklists to ensure lawful disclosure without infringing privacy or intellectual property rights.

Civil society, media and market effects: Journalists, researchers and non-governmental organisations are expected to begin using the law to obtain data on public spending, procurement and service delivery. This should support more informed public debate and strengthen monitoring of public bodies. Businesses may experience clearer access to non-confidential regulatory and market information, supporting planning and compliance.

Conclusion

The right to information law is positioned to be a practical tool for transparency and accountability in Iraq, provided its procedures are applied consistently and its exemptions are interpreted narrowly and with reasons. The law sets clear request timelines, establishes an accountable Information Department, and creates specialised committees to resolve objections, all of which support predictable administration.