South Africa pulls draft AI policy after discovery of fake references, raising questions on government credibility

South Africa’s Communications and Digital Technologies Minister, Solly Malatsi, has withdrawn a draft national AI policy after it was found to contain fictitious references, sparking a debate on government oversight and reliability in the age of AI.

South Africa’s Communications and Digital Technologies Minister, Solly Malatsi, has pulled the draft national artificial intelligence policy from public consultation after the department confirmed it contained fabricated references, an error that has triggered a wider debate about whether government can credibly regulate a technology it may already have used carelessly in drafting its own rules.

According to the department, the policy’s publication for comment was followed by scrutiny that exposed fictitious academic sources in the reference list. Malatsi said the problem went beyond a simple editorial slip and damaged the draft’s integrity and credibility. He added that the most likely explanation was that AI-generated citations had been inserted without proper checking, a warning that has sharpened attention on the risks of relying on the same tools a policy is meant to govern.

The withdrawal is especially awkward because the draft had only recently cleared cabinet and was opened for public submissions on 10 April, with comments due by 10 June. Reports from several South African and international outlets say the document was meant to provide the country’s first formal framework for AI governance, innovation and responsible deployment, while also dealing with issues such as economic transformation, talent development and oversight. Instead, the episode has turned into a test of ministerial accountability.

Malatsi said the department would move to internal consequence management for those responsible for drafting and quality assurance, while insisting that the episode should reinforce, rather than weaken, the case for human oversight in AI use. For critics, however, the damage is already political as well as procedural: a policy intended to set standards for trustworthy AI has itself become a case study in what happens when verification fails.

Source Reference Map

Inspired by headline at: ^[1]

Sources by paragraph:

Source: Noah Wire Services

Noah Fact Check Pro

The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.

Freshness check

Score:
10

Notes:
The article reports on a recent event, with the latest publication date being April 27, 2026. No evidence of recycled or outdated content was found.

Quotes check

Score:
8

Notes:
Direct quotes from Minister Solly Malatsi are consistent across multiple reputable sources. However, the exact wording of some quotes varies slightly between sources, which may indicate paraphrasing or slight editorial differences.

Source reliability

Score:
9

Notes:
The article cites reputable sources such as Xinhua, The Mail & Guardian, and TimesLIVE. However, some sources are regional and may have limited international reach, which could affect the breadth of coverage.

Plausibility check

Score:
10

Notes:
The claims made in the article are plausible and align with the reported withdrawal of South Africa’s draft AI policy due to fictitious references. No contradictory information was found.

Overall assessment

Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS

Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH

Summary:
The article provides a timely and plausible account of the withdrawal of South Africa’s draft AI policy due to fictitious references. It cites multiple reputable sources, and the content is accessible without paywalls. While some sources are regional, the overall coverage is comprehensive and consistent.