Some of the 67 references listed at the bottom of the draft policy either don’t exist or refer to articles that were not published in recognised journals.
Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies, Solly Malatsi, said investigations will be conducted to determine whether anyone is responsible for wrongdoing in the compilation of research for South Africa’s Artificial Intelligence (AI) policy.
Malatsi published the draft policy in the Government Gazette for public comment earlier in April. According to the document, the purpose of the policy is to establish national priorities and norms for AI, and to recognise “sector-specific dynamics”.
The draft policy proposes creating a raft of new institutions to regulate AI. This includes an AI Ethics Board, an AI Safety Institute, and an AI Insurance Superfund responsible for compensating people or entities “harmed by AI-driven outcomes”.
Credibility concerns surrounding AI policy
“I have asked the DG to investigate and take action against anyone found to be responsible for any wrongdoing,” said Malatsi on X on Saturday.
This follows an article by News24 that revealed fake and fabricated research was used in drafting the policy.
The article said that some of the 67 references listed at the bottom of the draft policy either don’t exist or refer to articles that were not published in recognised journals.
Review of references in AI policy
The publication further stated that when it asked the department to provide evidence that the journal articles existed, the department said it was reviewing the reference list to ensure accuracy, including how the “minor referencing discrepancies” may have happened.
It was also noted that the department kicked off the draft policy process in 2024, and the document had gone through many iterations. The department further told the department it needed time to establish where the discrepancies came from, but downplayed their importance.
“We can confirm that these technical referencing matters do not affect the substance, integrity or policy direction of the Draft National AI Policy Framework,” it said.
Withdraw policy
The chairperson of parliament’s portfolio committee on communications and digital technologies, Khusela Diko, called on Malatsi to withdraw the draft due to controversy about its integrity.
Diko, in a post on X, did not hold back. She said, “With the integrity of the draft AI policy seriously called into question, here’s an alternative to counter-productive grandstanding.
“Withdraw it immediately so you don’t face further embarrassment and lose more credibility.”
She added that Malatsi must subject the policy to the “the rigorous review (without using ChatGPT this time) demanded of a national policy on the most transformative technology of the 21st century.”
Looking for scapegoat?
Diko said the policy can then be re-release for public comment once Malatsi has a product he can take full ownership of. “Stop looking for a scapegoat (or should we say a scape-bot?),” she said.
The Citizen reached out to the department to find out if the draft will be withdrawn. A comment will be added once received. However, reports suggest he has done so on Sunday evening.
TechCentral reported Malatsi cited it was necessary to withdraw the draft policy after internal investigations confirmed that the draft policy “contains various fictitious sources in its reference list”.
“This failure is not a mere technical issue. [It] has compromised the integrity and credibility of the draft policy. As such, I am withdrawing [it],” Malatsi said.
“The most plausible explanation is that AI-generated citations were included without proper verification. This should not have happened.”
Support Local Journalism
Add The Citizen as a Preferred Source on Google and follow us on Google News to see more of our trusted reporting in Google News and Top Stories.