South Africa's draft AI policy contains citations to research papers that don't exist

South Africa's Draft AI Policy Contains Fabricated Research Citations

South Africa's Department of Communications and Digital Technologies released a draft national AI policy in April 2026 meant to signal the country's commitment to governing artificial intelligence. Instead, it revealed a more immediate problem: the policy itself was built on citations to research papers that don't exist.

According to reporting by News24, multiple academic references embedded in the document pointed to studies authored by researchers who never wrote on those topics. The citations appeared credible. They were fabricated.

The diagnosis came quickly: generative AI hallucinations. The drafters had apparently fed prompts into an AI tool, published the output without verification, and submitted it as the foundation for national legislation.

The Verification Problem

A government department tasked with regulating AI deployed that same technology to write the regulation, then failed to check the AI's work. The result is a draft policy containing what critics describe as fabricated research dressed in the language of authority.

For PR and communications professionals, the case study is direct: outsourcing research to unverified AI tools and presenting the output as credible creates immediate credibility damage.

The Department of Communications and Digital Technologies has not publicly disputed the findings. Officials have characterized the draft as a "work in progress" and a "point of departure" - language designed to manage expectations while the document remains open for public comment through June 2026.

What Comes Next

First drafts of major policy documents are rarely final. That framing, however, doesn't address the core issue: a government department responsible for digital governance appears to have outsourced core research functions to an unverified tool, then presented the output as a credible basis for national legislation.

It remains unclear whether officials will rebuild the document's evidence base using human-verified sources before it advances through the legislative process.