Africa-Press – South-Africa. Major South African law firm Werksmans has highlighted various issues with the government’s proposed legislation seeking to regulate artificial intelligence (AI).
This includes concerns about the draft policy’s stance on privacy rights and a gap between principle and practice on issues such as data protection.
Werksmans Attorneys director and regulatory head Ahmore-Burger Smidt described South Africa’s Draft National Artificial Intelligence Policy as an “ambitious and necessary step”.
This draft policy, approved by Cabinet on 25 March, is aimed at positioning the country within the global AI economy.
The Draft National AI Policy sets South Africa’s AI policy agenda, but given the technology’s wide range of applications, it does not aim to address every aspect of AI.
According to the Government Gazette of 10 April, the primary objective of a national policy is to identify the core principles that guide sectoral approaches.
Considering the rapid development and mainstream adoption of AI technologies, traditional regulatory or policy development approaches are unlikely to address all aspects of these technologies.
Therefore, the Draft National AI Policy is considered a “work-in-progress”, with the government’s final approach to the AI Policy agenda requiring extensive consultations with local and international experts.
“The Draft National AI Policy should thus be seen as a point of departure and indication of the government’s current thinking, rather than a strict indication of South Africa’s final approach to the AI policy landscape,” the Government Gazette explained.
South Africa’s government is one of many around the world looking to regulate AI amid its boom in popularity and common usage over the past few years.
AI technologies, as they’re known today, remain relatively new and are evolving and expanding at a rapid pace.
This makes sufficiently regulating the technology extremely difficult, and presents significant risks to countries worldwide.
In the Allianz Risk Barometer for 2026, the firm included AI as a standalone risk for the first time, having previously been included under the banner of “new technologies”.
In its 2026 report, Allianz also identified AI as one of the top concerns for multiple countries, including Australia, Brazil, China, and the United Kingdom.
For South Africa, the risks presented by AI ranked third among the country’s top concerns, just below cyber risks and business interruption.
Werksmans concerns
Werksmans Attorneys director and regulatory head Ahmore-Burger Smidt
Burger-Smidt said the Draft National AI Policy, as it currently stands, shows clear alignment with leading international frameworks.
This is particularly true for the policy’s adoption of a risk-based approach and its emphasis on ethical AI principles.
However, she said that while the vision is compelling, “the policy often stops short of providing the level of detail businesses and institutions will need to operate with certainty”.
She specifically highlighted uncertainties surrounding the policy’s approach to defining risk categories and setting enforceable compliance standards.
“Of greater concern is the gap between principle and practice on issues like privacy and data protection,” she explained.
While the draft policy signals alignment with the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA), she said it does not adequately address how this will look in practice.
In its current form, the policy does not show how core concepts such as purpose limitation and data minimisation will function in AI systems that rely on large, repurposed datasets.
“Similarly, the rights of individuals in the context of automated decision-making are underdeveloped, potentially placing South Africa behind more mature jurisdictions like the EU and UK,” she said.
Aside from this, Burger-Smidt said the draft also raises questions about implementation, particularly concerning its proposal to introduce multiple new AI-focused institutions.
This includes a National AI Commission, an AI Ethics Board, an AI Regulatory Authority, an AI Ombudsperson Office, a National AI Safety Institute, and an AI Insurance Superfund modelled on the Road Accident Fund.
“This could create fragmentation in an already complex regulatory landscape, without clear guidance on roles, coordination, or resourcing,” she warned.
“As the public comment process unfolds, there is a critical opportunity for stakeholders to push for greater clarity, stronger protections, and a more streamlined approach to governance.”
This, she said, will ensure that South Africa’s AI ambitions translate into practical, effective regulation.
For More News And Analysis About South-Africa Follow Africa-Press
