South Africa has pulled its initial AI policy draft following the revelation that several citations were generated by AI and could not be verified, raising concerns about oversight in technological governance.

South Africa has withdrawn its first draft national artificial intelligence policy after officials discovered that parts of the document appeared to rely on AI-generated references that could not be verified, according to the country’s communications minister.

Solly Malatsi said internal checks confirmed that several citations in the draft were fictitious and that the lapse undermined both the integrity and credibility of the policy process. He said the most likely explanation was that generated references had been included without proper verification, adding that this should not have happened.

The draft had been intended to set out South Africa’s approach to AI governance while also positioning the country as a regional leader in innovation. It proposed new bodies, including a national AI commission, an AI ethics board and a regulatory authority, alongside incentives such as tax breaks, grants and subsidies to encourage private-sector investment in AI infrastructure.

The controversy surfaced after News24 identified at least six apparently fake academic references among 67 listed in the document. Editors at journals including the South African Journal of Philosophy, AI & Society and the Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy later confirmed that the cited articles did not exist, even though the journals themselves were real. Reuters-style reporting from South African outlets said Malatsi promised consequences for those responsible for the drafting process.

The episode comes as concern grows internationally over the use of generative AI in research and public administration. A Nature study cited in the reporting found that more than 2.5% of papers published in 2025 contained at least one potentially fabricated reference, up from 0.3% in 2024, suggesting the problem is becoming more common as language models are used for drafting and summarising material. Malatsi said the affair was a lesson in why human oversight remains essential, and the policy is expected to be revised before being republished for public comment.

Source Reference Map

Inspired by headline at: [1]

Sources by paragraph: - Paragraph 1: [2], [3] - Paragraph 2: [2], [3], [4] - Paragraph 3: [2], [5] - Paragraph 4: [2], [5], [6], [7] - Paragraph 5: [1], [2]

Source: Noah Wire Services

Verification / Sources

  • https://unn.ua/news/par-vidklykala-polityku-shchodo-shi-pislia-toho-yak-bulo-vyiavleno-shcho-yii-napysav-shi - Please view link - unable to able to access data
  • https://www.polity.org.za/article/south-africa-withdraws-ai-policy-due-to-fake-ai-generated-sources-2026-04-28 - South Africa has withdrawn its first draft national AI policy after revelations that it contained fictitious sources in its reference list, which appeared to have been AI-generated. Communications and Digital Technologies Minister Solly Malatsi stated that AI-generated citations were included without proper verification, compromising the integrity and credibility of the draft policy. The policy aimed to position South Africa as a leader in AI innovation while addressing ethical, social, and economic challenges. It outlined plans to establish new institutions, including a National AI Commission, an AI Ethics Board, and an AI Regulatory Authority, and to create incentives such as tax breaks, grants, and subsidies to encourage private-sector collaboration. Malatsi mentioned that there would be consequences for those responsible for drafting the policy and did not specify when a new one would be released. He emphasized the critical importance of vigilant human oversight over the use of artificial intelligence, describing the incident as a lesson taken with humility.
  • https://english.news.cn/20260427/8d9176e8c26b4c9f82f2ff6aee13dd30/c.html - South Africa has withdrawn its Draft National Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy after it emerged that the document contained fictitious references. Communications and Digital Technologies Minister Solly Malatsi announced the withdrawal, stating that internal checks confirmed the presence of unverifiable references. He described the lapse as a serious breach that undermined the integrity and credibility of the proposed policy framework. The draft AI policy was approved by the Cabinet on March 25 for public comment. According to a government gazette dated April 10, the public had until June 10 to comment on the policy. Malatsi emphasized the importance of human oversight in the use of AI, noting that the failure was not a mere technical issue but compromised the policy's credibility.
  • https://mg.co.za/article/2026-04-27-malatsi-withdraws-draft-ai-policy-over-fake-citations/ - Communications and Digital Technologies Minister Solly Malatsi has withdrawn South Africa’s draft national artificial intelligence (AI) policy after it emerged that the document’s reference list included fictitious sources. In a statement, Malatsi said an internal review confirmed the mistake was noticed after revelations emerged about unverifiable references. He described the failure as compromising the integrity and credibility of the draft policy. The draft policy had been approved by cabinet on March 25, with a further special sitting on April 1, before it was released for public comment. The incident underscores the need for robust oversight in the use of AI.
  • https://apanews.net/south-africa-withdraws-ai-policy-after-fictitious-sources-found/ - South Africa has withdrawn its draft National Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy after investigations confirmed the document contained fictitious academic sources, prompting Communications and Digital Technologies Minister Solly Malatsi to scrap the policy. Malatsi announced that the draft policy published for public comment contained fabricated academic references, a discovery that has triggered a full withdrawal of the document. Internal checks confirmed that several citations listed in the draft were fictitious, with investigations suggesting that AI-generated citations were included without verification, undermining the credibility of a policy intended to guide the country’s AI governance. The draft policy had been approved by cabinet on March 25, 2026, and gazetted on April 10, opening a 60-day public consultation period. It was meant to expand South Africa’s initial AI framework by embedding principles such as intergenerational equity and setting national priorities across sectors including manufacturing, energy, infrastructure, transport, and trade. Deputy President Paul Mashatile had recently described the policy as central to the country’s broader Fourth Industrial Revolution strategy. However, the policy’s credibility collapsed after media reports revealed that several academic journals cited in the document did not exist, prompting the department to launch an internal review.
  • https://www.businessday.co.za/news/2026-04-27-ai-policy-fiasco-shows-why-oversight-matters/ - The South African government’s withdrawal of its recently gazetted national AI policy highlights the need for robust oversight of the use of AI. The Department of Communications and Digital Technologies, led by Minister Solly Malatsi, said it had discovered fake and fictitious sources cited in the document, likely introduced by AI. Following revelations that the draft national AI policy published for public comment contains various fictitious sources in its reference list, internal checks confirmed that this was the case. Malatsi stated that this failure is not a mere technical issue but has compromised the integrity and credibility of the draft policy.
  • https://nairametrics.com/2026/04/27/south-africa-withdraws-draft-ai-policy-over-fake-ai-generated-references/ - South Africa’s Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies, Solly Malatsi, has withdrawn the country’s Draft National Artificial Intelligence Policy after it was discovered that the document contained fictitious sources in its reference list. The minister disclosed this in a statement posted on his X handle on Sunday. He described the lapse as a serious breach that undermined the integrity and credibility of the proposed policy framework. According to Malatsi, internal checks were launched after concerns emerged over the references cited in the draft document, confirming that several of the listed sources were not genuine.

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 28, 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 sources. However, the exact wording of some quotes varies slightly between sources, which may indicate paraphrasing or slight alterations.

Source reliability

Score: 9

Notes: The article cites reputable sources such as Reuters and Polity.org.za. However, the inclusion of a Ukrainian news outlet (unn.ua) raises questions about the independence and potential biases of the sources.

Plausibility check

Score: 9

Notes: The claims about fictitious AI-generated references in South Africa's draft AI policy are plausible and align with known issues in AI-generated content. However, the involvement of a Ukrainian news outlet in reporting on South African policy raises questions about the accuracy and relevance of the information.

Overall assessment

Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): FAIL

Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM

Summary: The article reports on a recent event regarding South Africa's withdrawal of its draft AI policy due to fictitious AI-generated references. While the content is timely and sourced from reputable outlets, the inclusion of a Ukrainian news outlet raises concerns about the independence and potential biases of the sources. Additionally, slight variations in direct quotes suggest potential paraphrasing or alterations, which could affect the accuracy of the information presented. Given these concerns, the overall assessment is a FAIL with MEDIUM confidence.