Malatsi calls AI policy blunder 'quite embarrassing'

South Africa's push to regulate artificial intelligence hit an unexpected snag this week when the Department of Communications and Digital Technologies discovered its own draft AI policy contained fabricated references—ironically, hallucinated text generated by the very technology it aimed to govern.

Communications Minister Solly Malatsi withdrew the gazetted policy on April 28, 2026, after officials identified unverified citations embedded in the document. The draft had been open for public comment until June, positioning South Africa as an early continental voice on AI ethics and adoption frameworks. The reversal represents a significant credibility blow for policymakers tasked with building investor confidence in the country's digital economy.

## What happened to South Africa's AI policy?

The Department of Communications and Digital Technologies published a draft Artificial Intelligence Policy for stakeholder consultation, but internal reviews revealed the document contained hallucinated references—factually incorrect citations that appeared authentic but had no basis in reality. These were not isolated typos; they represented systematic failures in the policy's authentication and authorization chain. Malatsi acknowledged the irony bluntly: his department fell victim to the exact risks it was attempting to regulate.

## Why is this embarrassing for South Africa's tech leadership?

The incident undermines South Africa's credibility as a regulatory authority at a critical moment. The continent is racing to establish AI governance frameworks before global standards solidify—early movers gain soft power and attract tech investment. Kenya, Nigeria, and Egypt have also begun AI policy consultations, but none have experienced such a public stumble. For investors evaluating South Africa's institutional capacity to manage emerging technologies, the policy failure signals weak internal oversight and quality assurance processes. Malatsi admitted that despite multiple stages of review and stakeholder engagement, the document "fell short"—a troubling admission for a government seeking to attract fintech, AI research, and digital services investment.

## How does this affect South Africa's digital economy ambitions?

The withdrawal delays critical AI governance. South Africa's National Development Plan targets digital transformation as an economic lever, particularly in financial services, manufacturing, and public administration. Without clear AI ethics guidelines, companies face uncertainty around data usage, algorithmic transparency, and liability—factors multinational tech firms weigh heavily before establishing regional hubs. The delay also signals to investors that South African regulatory institutions may lack the technical sophistication to oversee complex technologies effectively.

Malatsi took "full responsibility" and promised action against officials involved, but the real test lies in the revised policy's rigor. South Africa must now balance speed with credibility. A hastily rewritten framework could invite further criticism; a prolonged review risks falling behind regional peers. The department has not announced a timeline for resubmission.

The incident also raises uncomfortable questions about institutional AI literacy among government technocrats. If policymakers cannot validate AI-generated content in their own policy documents, how can they effectively regulate AI adoption across finance, healthcare, and critical infrastructure?

---