THE proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) and its rapid integration in various facets of social life including journalism, education, manufacturing, mining, health and agriculture has prompted questions on whether African countries should exercise their data sovereignty.
While the push for national policies that prioritise data sovereignty—which refers to the fact that data is subject to the laws and governance structures of the nation where they are collected — cannot be dismissed at face value, it is invaluable to foreground some of the key pillars of a robust and technology-neutral AI regulation.
Calls to regulate digital platforms and its latest cousin AI have grown louder in scholarly and policy circles.
Whereas the European Union has led in this domain with its risk-based approach to AI, in recent months Africa has adopted the Continental AI Strategy which calls for unified national approaches among African Union (AU) member States to navigate the complexities of AI-driven change, aiming to strengthen regional and global cooperation and position Africa as a leader in inclusive and responsible AI development.
Very few African countries have adopted AI national strategies. These include Benin, Egypt, Ghana, Mauritius, Rwanda, Senegal and Tunisia. In these countries, no formal regulation has been implemented.
Without doubt, AI is one of the most revolutionary technologies of our time.
Keep Reading
- Time running out for SA-based Zimbos
- Zim needs committed leaders to escape political, economic quicksands
- Byo author eyes SA award
- Sally Mugabe renal unit disappears
While it is often framed as a technology with the potential to supplant human labour, it can also be seen as a complementary to human productivity.
Thus, instead of seeing AI as a job replacement tool, we can view it as an ally with the potential to reshape and reboot our industries, a creator of employment and a beneficiation enhancement tool.
Just like any other progressive continent, Africa must not lag behind in seizing the economic development prospects presented by the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR).
Cloud and digital technologies, including quantum computing, machine learning and AI tools and systems, possess significant potential to enhance the production and transportation of abundant raw resources in Zimbabwe and to revitalise agro-based and services industries on the continent.
But, of course, the regulation question remains the elephant in the room. The question is what comes first? Regulating data or AI? Or both? This is an egg and hen situation. These are complex questions with diverse responses.
Partly because of catchphrases like “data is the new oil”, it has become crucial to deal with the major ingredient in the AI ecosystem.
Since data plays a fundamental role in AI development and deployment, it is advisable that African states like Zimbabwe focus on data regulation before rushing to enact AI legislation.
The current climate seems to be more favourable to the view that African states should put more emphasis on strengthening data management standards rather than enacting new laws pertaining to AI.
There is realisation that adequate data governance provides a viable pathway toward regulating AI, facilitating its responsible utilisation and development.
The first and most important step towards better regulation of AI is the effective implementation and enforcement of data protection regulations.
Biometrics, profiling and automated processing are all parts of personal data that must adhere to the rules laid down by data protection legislation, which also specifies the scope of such activities and the rights of persons.
Necessary and proportionate data protection laws are urgently required to safeguard the acquisition, processing and archiving of personal data by private and public agencies.
A crucial framework for regulating elements of AI, especially the automated processing of personal data, is the Malabo Convention, which is the African Union (AU) Convention on Cyber Security and Personal Data Protection.
This soft law provides some of the most relevant touch points on what AU member States can do to protect personal data and prevent cybercrime.
Yet despite the ratification of the Malabo Convention, close to twenty African countries have not yet passed data protection laws.
While Zimbabwe passed the Cyber and Data Protection in 2021, more still needs to be done to infuse AI-related issues in the legislation.
As part of implementing the Cyber and Data Protection Act, there is urgent need to establish, capacitate and adequately fund the Data Protection Authority of Zimbabwe.
The Data protection regulator should be less susceptible to economic and political pressure and intimidation.
As the country waits for the formal launch of the AI national policy, our advice to policy makers is that the governance AI should strike a balance between promotion innovation and addressing structural harms embedded in the design and development of AI tools and systems.
The wait-and-see technique, which may be more lucrative, involves integrating AI technology into regulated environments, such as AI regulatory sandboxes, where these technologies are assessed in relation to existing regulations.
While this is not an easy process, Zimbabwe must collaborate and exchange knowledge and experience regarding data governance within the African ecosystem.
Insights can be gleaned from Mauritius, and Rwanda, which have been engaged in comprehending AI within their respective national settings. The European Union (EU) provides insights through its AI Act.
Zimbabwe like many other African countries can benefit from initiatives such as the EU’s Global Gateway strategy and a Unesco-EU partnership on AI.
Zimbabwe should not fall for the temptation to cut and paste from the West without careful domestication to address felt needs, interests and challenges.
We recommend that in providing financial support for AI policy development, international partners must respect the sovereignty of African states and avoid imposing or influencing their approaches to AI regulation.
African countries including Zimbabwe should develop AI strategies, laws and policies that meet their unique needs while promoting human rights in line with the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
Zimbabwe should develop culturally aligned and feasible data and digital governance solutions that puts its interests and national development aspirations at the centre of its policy formulation.
Zimbabwe can also learn from Namibia and South Africa, which have managed to establish taskforces and commissions on the Fourth Industrial Revolution.
In this regard, we urge ICT, Postal and Courier Services minister Tatenda Mavetera to establish a Taskforce on Digital Transformation.
Furthermore, as part of Education 5.0, public universities should be encouraged to establish centres of excellence on AI and digital transformation.
The country should work towards reinforcing data and AI regulation along with building the human capital necessary to sustain AI ecosystems.
This entails setting up centres of excellence on AI and digital transformation at all STEM [science, technology, engineering and mathematics] aligned universities.
The government must also harness the capabilities of various ministries to support the development of data and AI legislation.
An inter-ministerial taskforce is highly recommended to address the cross-cutting nature of AI.
While it is easy to be spectators from the global gallery as the United States and China fight for domination in the AI race, Zimbabwe and the rest of the African continent cannot afford to remain disinterested bystanders.
The government should not be the only actor shaping data and AI policy in Zimbabwe.
There is need for a multisectoral approach — whereby advocacy groups, academia, policymakers, start-ups, policy institutes, regional and sub-regional institutions, citizens, development partners, and tech companies have an equal say in shaping the policy direction of the country.
In this regard, the government of Zimbabwe through the ICT, Postal and Courier Services ministry should provide opportunities for local stakeholders to shape data and AI regulation by serving on advisory bodies and expert groups.
These advisory bodies should be adequately resourced and staffed with highly qualified personnel.
Meaningful participation of local stakeholders has the potential to enhance data stewardship and oversight of AI systems but also increase policy ownership at the implementation stage.
- Hilary Mare is a PHD candidate with the Department of Communication and Media at the University of Johannesburg.
- Admire Mare is an associate professor and Head of Department: Communication and Media at the University of Johannesburg. He is a thought leader on digital platforms and AI regulation.