South Africa's AI policy was withdrawn over citations that did not exist
The draft national AI policy cited sources that were never written. The lesson for every ministry using AI to draft: someone has to check.
South Africa's Department of Communications and Digital Technologies published its Draft National Artificial Intelligence Policy for public comment on 10 April 2026. The 60-day comment period closed on 10 June. Two days later, on 12 June, the draft was withdrawn.
Why it was pulled
The draft contained references to sources that do not exist. Several of its 67 references were fictitious, a sign that AI had been used to produce it without proper checking, and the invented citations had passed through several layers of departmental review, as the record of the policy sets out. The governing party's parliamentary caucus issued a statement on the minister's use of AI in drafting the policy.
The irony is plain: the draft itself called for human oversight and accountability, and for AI systems transparent enough that people can understand how their outputs are reached.
The lesson for other governments
Generative tools are now part of how many civil servants draft. The South African case shows where the risk sits: not in using the tool, but in treating its output as checked. A citation is a factual claim, and every one needs to be opened and read by a person before a document carries a government's name.
Research desk, Online
Stories by the IQGov research desk are written from public documents, official data and on-record statements, which are listed and linked at the end of each piece.
