The Scottish Information Commissioner has published guidance for requesters on using artificial intelligence tools to help make freedom of information requests and warned that obviously AI-generated appeals to his office will treated as vexatious.
The guidance, published on the Commissioner's website warns that while acknowledges that AI can help people make requests that are clear, focused and well-worded, it can also generate requests which are unnecessarily complex or hard for a public body to understand. AI-supported requests can include fabricated information, known as hallucinations, creating unnecessary work for authorities, increasing the likelihood of delay, and potentially leading to refusal where the cost or impact on the organisation is excessive.
The Commissioner, David Hamilton, warned that he is unlikely to support unchecked, machine-generated FOI appeals to his office. Under section 49(1) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002, the Commissioner can refuse to investigate appeals he finds frivolous or vexatious and that appeals that appear to be largely machine-generated or contain AI hallucinations are more likely to be considered as such.
He also cautioned that submitting large volumes of requests in a short period may increase the likelihood of a public body treating requests as vexatious under section 14 of FOISA, or manifestly unreasonable under regulation 10(4)(b) of the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004.
The guidance follows the Commissioner's introduction last month of a new discretionary case management measure allowing him, where necessary to protect the integrity of the appeals process, to restrict the number of FOI appeals from an individual requester under live investigation to five. Announcing that measure, the Commissioner said it "will not be used lightly" but was available where necessary to ensure "the FOI rights of others are not exploited or harmed by a proliferation of automated requests", adding that the time was right for a national conversation about the impact of machine-generated AI activity on public services.
The seven tips advise requesters to: keep requests simple, clear and focused; ensure the request reflects the information the requester actually wants, cutting back where AI has expanded it; check the accuracy of any AI-generated references before relying on them in correspondence; set out their own reasons for dissatisfaction when requesting a review, rather than reasons suggested by an AI tool; consider the cumulative impact of submitting multiple requests in a short period; make use of public bodies' duty to advise and assist requesters in framing requests; and review the tone of AI-drafted requests, which can sometimes appear abrupt, demanding or even rude.
The guidance recommends that requesters ask AI to make suggestions on their own draft request rather than asking it to create a new request, to ensure the requester's own interests remain at the heart of the request.
There was an 83% increase in appeals to the Commissioner over the last year, from 593 in 2024-25 to 1,084 in 2025-26, including a two-month period in which 120 appeals were received from just two applicants, with evidence that those appeals were entirely AI-generated. Polling commissioned by the Commissioner found that 85% of respondents with a view supported some form of control on high-volume AI requests.
The guidance sits alongside separate guidance published by the UK Information Commissioner's Office in May to help public authorities across the UK manage AI-generated FOI requests, addressing practical issues including requests that misinterpret or misquote FOI legislation, higher volumes of requests requiring clarification, and maintaining fair and consistent handling regardless of how requests are created.
