By 
South Africa ‘s Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies, Solly Malatsi, announced the immediate withdrawal of the Draft National Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy. The decision follows internal confirmations that the document contained significant portions of unverified, AI-generated content, including fictitious academic and legal references.
The controversy began shortly after the draft was published for public comment. Stakeholders and industry experts identified several citations in the reference list that did not exist in academic databases. An internal inquiry subsequently confirmed that these hallucinations were the result of using generative artificial intelligence tools during the drafting process without sufficient human oversight.
Minister Malatsi characterized the inclusion of these fabricated citations as a failure that has compromised the integrity and credibility of the entire policy framework. The Minister emphasized that the Department of Communications and Digital Technologies (DCDT) is expected to maintain the highest standards of accuracy, particularly when dealing with digital policy environments.
“This failure is not a mere technical issue but has compromised the integrity and credibility of the draft policy. As such, I am withdrawing the Draft National Artificial Intelligence Policy,” said Malatsi.
The Ministry has confirmed that the incident has triggered a series of internal reviews. Minister Malatsi stated that consequence management will be implemented for the officials and teams responsible for the drafting and quality assurance of the document. This move signals a zero-tolerance approach to the unverified use of automation in official state communications.
The incident has sparked significant debate within the South African technology sector regarding the ethical use of AI in government. While AI tools are increasingly used to streamline administrative tasks, this case serves as a high-profile example of the risks associated with replacing expert research with automated generation.
The Ministry noted that this lapse underscores why vigilant human oversight remains a critical component of technological integration.
The DCDT is expected to restart the drafting process, this time with a renewed focus on manual verification and empirical research to restore public trust.
Minister Malatsi concluded by reassuring the public that the matter is being treated with gravity. The Department remains committed to leading the country’s digital policy environment but will do so under stricter quality control measures to ensure that future drafts meet the necessary standards of institutional
excellence.
Activist Zackie Achmat published part of the letter, which raised the alarm over the fake sources of the Draft South Africa National Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy.
“Initial study of the policy has revealed that a number of sources cited in the policy do not in fact exist. I refer to the following six sources,” it said.
- Source 5 – Babatunde, O., & Mnguni, P. (2023). “Challenges and Opportunities in Regulating AI: Perspectives from South Africa.” AI Policy Journal, 2(3), 143-156.
- Source 9 – Burman, A., & Sewpersadh, K. (2022). “Legal Frameworks for AI in South Africa: Balancing Innovation and Accountability.” South African Journal of Philosophy, 41(2), 207-217.
- Source 10 – Cavaliere, F., McGregor, R., & Hersh, M. (2022). “Artificial Intelligence and Ethics in Emerging Economies: The Case of South Africa.” AI & Society, 37(4), 565-583.
- Source 19 – Etale, A. E., & Naidoo, P. (2021). “Accountability and Transparency in African AI Policies: Lessons from South Africa.” African Journal of Public Affairs, 9(1), 39-52.
- Source 22 – Fourie, I., & Botha, A. (2021). “AI Ethics in South Africa: Implications for Trust and Fairness in AI.” African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, 13(5), 677-688.
- Source 56 – Smith, M., & Mahomed, R. (2021). “The Impact of AI on Social Justice in South Africa.” Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy, 18(3), 313-329.
Comments