Somali Jobs INc

In my view, the first Global Dialogue on AI Governance would be a success for Africa if it delivers three tangible outcomes: First, a concrete capacity-building mechanism. Success is not a paragraph of solidarity but a committed roadmap to establish an AI Capacity Fund—with defined contributions, timelines, and disbursement mechanisms—that finances computing infrastructure, skills development, and local research ecosystems across African nations. Without this, the digital divide widens, and Africa remains a consumer, not a co-author. Second, inclusion of African expertise in the Scientific Panel's ongoing work. The Independent International Scientific Panel's report must reflect African realities—our languages, our contexts, our risks. Success means the Co-Chairs' summary explicitly acknowledges regional disparities and mandates that future Panel compositions include substantive African scientific representation, not symbolic participation. Third, a guaranteed seat in governance follow-up. Africa has witnessed too many global processes where we are consulted but not included in decision-making. Success requires a structured mechanism—through the African Union or regional rotations—that ensures African governments and stakeholders shape the Dialogue's agenda beyond July, not merely react to it. For Africa, success is simple: the Dialogue must move from inviting us to the table to ensuring we help build it.

• Safe, secure and trustworthy AI
• Social, economic, ethical, cultural, linguistic and technical implications of AI
• AI capacity-building
• Protection and promotion of human rights

I have selected these three outcomes because they directly address the structural barriers that exclude Africa from shaping global AI governance. First, a concrete capacity-building mechanism. Africa cannot participate meaningfully in AI governance without the foundational infrastructure to build, deploy, and assess AI systems. Computing power, skilled personnel, and research funding are not luxuries-they are prerequisites. An AI Capacity Fund would transform rhetorical commitments into tangible resources, enabling African institutions to contribute evidence-based perspectives rather than rely on imported frameworks. Without this, the digital divide becomes a governance divide. Second, inclusion of African expertise in the Scientific Panel. The Independent International Scientific Panel will frame how the world understands AI's risks and opportunities. If African scientists, linguists, and ethicists are absent, the Panel's findings will inevitably reflect Northern priorities. They will overlook how AI systems fail to understand African languages, misdiagnose based on unrepresentative medical data, or reinforce biases against African populations. Substantive inclusion ensures the Panel's work is truly global, not merely universal in name. Third, a guaranteed seat in governance follow-up. Africa has long experienced consultation without representation. We are invited to speak, then excluded from drafting. A structured mechanism-anchored in the African Union-ensures that African voices shape the Dialogue's ongoing agenda, not merely react to it. This transforms the process from a one-off event into an enduring partnership. These three outcomes are interconnected: capacity enables participation, expertise ensures relevance, and structural inclusion guarantees continuity. Together, they move Africa from the margins to the center of building an AI future that serves all humanity.

Cross-Cutting and Emerging Issues from an African Perspective Yes, several cross-cutting issues not explicitly captured by the listed themes demand urgent attention. First, data sovereignty and economic exploitation. The themes address open data and open models but overlook Africa's right to control its data. Currently, African data is extracted by foreign corporations, trained into AI systems abroad, and sold back to Africans-with no benefit to the communities that generated it. This is digital colonialism. The Dialogue must address data governance frameworks that ensure fair value-sharing and protect African ownership of African data. Second, environmental impact. Nowhere in the themes is the ecological cost of AI mentioned. Training large models consumes enormous energy and water. For Africa, already bearing the brunt of climate change despite minimal emissions, this is critical. We cannot pursue AI development that deepens environmental injustice. The Dialogue must integrate sustainability as a cross-cutting principle. Third, labor displacement and just transition. AI will transform African labor markets-from formal sectors to the informal economy where most Africans work. The themes address economic implications broadly but lack specific focus on workforce disruption, social safety nets, and reskilling at scale. A just transition framework is essential. Fourth, algorithmic colonialism. Beyond data extraction, AI systems embed Northern values, assumptions, and priorities into decision-making tools used across Africa-from hiring to credit scoring to public service delivery. This is not neutral technology; it is value imposition. The cultural and linguistic theme touches this, but the governance dimension-who decides what values AI systems encode-requires explicit attention. These issues cut across every thematic area. Ignoring them risks building a global governance framework that perpetuates, rather than prevents, injustice.

1. Capacity-Building Gap Challenge: Africa has less than 1% of global data center capacity and 38% internet penetration. An ImpactHER survey found 86% of women across 52 African countries lack basic AI proficiency. We cannot govern what we cannot build. Opportunity: The AI 10 Billion Initiative aims to mobilize $10 billion by 2035, unlock 40 million jobs, and add $1 trillion to Africa's GDP—demonstrating continental ambition requiring global partnership. 2. Cultural and Linguistic Gap Challenge: When Ghana piloted AI tools including Twi and Hausa but excluded Ga, the GaDangme Council condemned it as discriminatory. Over 2,000 African languages face erasure if AI systems ignore them. Opportunity: Google Translate added Ga in 2024. Inclusion is possible but requires sustained investment in African-language datasets. 3. Human Rights and Data Sovereignty Gap Challenge: Pan-African Parliament President Charumbira warns uncontrolled external data access enables privacy violations, economic exploitation, and erosion of African knowledge systems. "If we do not control the data that goes into AI, we will not control the AI that shapes our future." Opportunity: The Pan-African Parliament will develop a Cybersecurity and AI Model Law, building on the AU Malabo Convention. The Cross-Cutting Challenge: Imported Frameworks Kenya's proposed AI Bill, modeled on the EU AI Act, imposes pre-deployment assessments and annual compliance reports. A Kenyan startup bears this burden while European competitors enter at marginal cost. Laws designed for powerful AI become barriers for local innovators. Conclusion Brookings argues: "The greatest risk is not missing the AI revolution, but joining it too early." Africa must sequence deliberately—digitize before automate, secure data before export, build capacity before import. The Global Dialogue must support Africa's right to chart its own course.

From an African perspective, the Global Dialogue on AI Governance can advance international cooperation by performing three critical functions that no existing platform currently fulfills. First, as a bridge-builder between fragmented initiatives. Numerous AI governance efforts exist—the OECD, GPAI, UNESCO, bilateral agreements—but they operate in silos. Africa engages with all, yet must navigate inconsistent standards and duplicate reporting. The Dialogue can harmonize these efforts, creating a coherent global architecture where African nations need not comply with competing frameworks simultaneously. This reduces the compliance burden on resource-constrained governments. Second, as a translator between science and policy. The Independent International Scientific Panel will produce evidence, but evidence alone does not drive action. The Dialogue must translate scientific findings—particularly on regional disparities, risks, and opportunities—into actionable policy recommendations. For Africa, this means ensuring the Panel's work directly informs capacity-building priorities, not merely academic discourse. Third, as an accountability mechanism. Current cooperation is voluntary and unenforceable. The Dialogue can establish follow-up processes that track commitments—on capacity funding, on data sovereignty, on inclusive representation—and hold actors accountable. Without accountability, cooperation becomes performance. Fourth, as a legitimate convenor. The UN's universality gives the Dialogue legitimacy no other platform possesses. For Africa, this is vital. We participate in many forums, but only the UN offers equal footing to all nations. The Dialogue must leverage this legitimacy to bring the private sector—particularly major AI developers—into a governance conversation where human rights, not market interests, set the agenda.

The AI Dialogue should connect with several foundational initiatives: First, the African Union's Continental AI Strategy. This provides Africa's unified framework for ethical, development-oriented AI governance. The AU-Google partnership advances sovereign AI capacity, training public officials and supporting local languages. Second, UNESCO's AI readiness work. Twenty-nine African countries use UNESCO's Readiness Assessment Methodology. UNESCO is training 15,000 government officials and 5,000 judicial workers across Africa. Third, the OECD-African Union AI Dialogue. This ongoing platform facilitates mutual learning on AI governance between OECD countries and AU member states. Fourth, the AI 10 Billion Initiative. Launched by AfDB and UNDP, this aims to mobilize $10 billion, unlock 40 million jobs, and add $1 trillion to Africa's GDP. The AI Dialogue's Added Value The Dialogue brings unique value existing initiatives cannot: First, coherence and harmonization. Currently, African nations navigate fragmented frameworks with inconsistent standards. The Dialogue can harmonize these into a coherent global architecture, reducing compliance burdens. Second, legitimacy and universality. Only the UN offers equal footing to all nations. For Africa, this ensures our voices are not filtered through regional or economic blocs. Third, science-to-policy translation. The Independent Scientific Panel's evidence must translate into actionable policy. The Dialogue can ensure scientific findings directly inform capacity-building priorities. Fourth, accountability and follow-up. Current cooperation is voluntary. The Dialogue can establish processes that track commitments and hold actors accountable. Fifth, private sector accountability. The Dialogue can leverage UN legitimacy to bring major AI developers into a governance conversation where human rights set the agenda.

Member States should set strategic direction, anchor political commitments, and ensure Dialogue outcomes feed into intergovernmental processes. African states, coordinated through the AU, must present unified positions. Private Sector must move beyond self-regulation. Companies should disclose AI system impacts on African contexts, contribute to capacity-building funds, and ensure their models serve African languages and communities—not merely extract data. Civil Society serves as accountability guardian. African civil society organizations must monitor commitments, amplify marginalized voices, and ground discussions in lived realities—particularly regarding human rights, data sovereignty, and algorithmic discrimination. Academia and Technical Community provide evidence. African researchers must shape the Scientific Panel's agenda, contribute local datasets, and translate global findings into regional relevance. International Organizations ensure coordination. ITU and UNESCO should harmonize their capacity-building programs with Dialogue outcomes, avoiding duplication and maximizing impact. Recommended Format and Structure First, regional preparatory dialogues. Before July 2026, structured regional consultations—like this one—must feed directly into programme design, not merely inform it. African priorities identified here must visibly shape thematic focus. Second, a multi-format plenary. The July Dialogue should combine high-level political commitments with deep-dive technical sessions where stakeholders co-develop solutions, not merely deliver statements. Third, a permanent follow-up mechanism. The Dialogue cannot be a one-off event. An intersessional working group—with guaranteed African representation—should track commitments, prepare for subsequent meetings, and ensure continuity. Fourth, dedicated private sector accountability sessions. Rather than general corporate participation, structure sessions where companies answer specific questions on human rights, data governance, and African-language inclusion. Fifth, civil society rapporteur role. Designate civil society representatives to provide real-time assessment of whether Dialogue discussions translate into meaningful stakeholder inclusion, not mere presence.

First, African policymakers and regulators. While African experts appear in consultations, African governments—particularly from smaller or francophone nations—lack sustained representation in standard-setting bodies. The EU AI Act shapes global norms, yet African governments had no vote in its drafting. Second, informal sector workers. Most Africans work in informal economies—market traders, transport workers, smallholder farmers. Their voices are absent, yet AI-driven platformization, credit-scoring, and surveillance directly impact their livelihoods. Third, women and girls. The ImpactHER survey revealing 86% of African women lack basic AI proficiency reflects broader exclusion. Women are underrepresented in AI design, policy, and governance globally. Fourth, Indigenous and minority language communities. Over 2,000 African languages face digital erasure. Communities speaking Ga, Ewe, or Dagbani lack representation in decisions about which languages AI systems recognize. Fifth, persons with disabilities. AI accessibility features are designed for Northern contexts. African disability communities are excluded from conversations about how AI serves—or fails—them. Sixth, smallholder farmers. Agriculture employs most Africans. Yet AI governance discussions prioritize corporate interests over how algorithmic land-grabbing, biased credit models, or inadequate climate tools affect food security. How They Could Be Included First, dedicated regional consultation tracks. Structure mandatory pre-Dialogue consultations in each African sub-region—Southern, East, West, Central, North—with outcomes formally integrated into programme design. Second, funding for diverse participation. Establish a trust fund covering travel, interpretation, and accessibility for underrepresented groups. Meaningful inclusion requires resources. Third, partnership with grassroots organizations. Work through women's cooperatives, farmer unions, and informal worker associations—not only capital-based NGOs—to channel lived experience into governance discussions. Fourth, linguistic accessibility. Provide interpretation in African languages, not only UN languages. Publish summaries in Swahili, Hausa, Yoruba, and Amharic. Fifth, specific representation quotas. Mandate that national delegations include civil society, women's organizations, and disability advocates—not only government officials. Sixth, community feedback mechanisms. Establish ongoing digital and offline channels for communities to report AI harms and propose solutions between Dialogue sessions.

To move beyond static speeches and foster genuine exchange, the AI Dialogue should adopt formats that prioritize interaction, inclusivity, and tangible outcomes. First, solution-oriented breakout laboratories. Rather than thematic panels with sequential presentations, structure facilitated labs where stakeholders co-design solutions to specific problems—such as "how to fund African-language dataset development" or "mechanisms for data value-sharing." Each lab produces a concrete output: a pilot proposal, a funding blueprint, or a joint statement of intent. Second, a Global South-led plenary session. Dedicate a high-level segment chaired by African Union representatives, where Southern governments set the agenda and Northern counterparts respond. This inverts traditional power dynamics and ensures African priorities frame the conversation. Third, real-time collaborative drafting. Use digital platforms to enable simultaneous editing of the Co-Chairs' summary by stakeholders in the room and online. This democratizes the drafting process and builds ownership of outcomes. Fourth, community testimonial segments. Open each thematic session with 5-minute video or live testimonies from affected communities—a Nigerian market trader on algorithmic pricing, a Kenyan farmer on biased credit scoring. Grounding policy in lived experience shifts discourse from abstract principle to urgent reality. Fifth, peer-review accountability circles. Structure small-group sessions where governments and companies are peer-reviewed on prior commitments—for example, "what has your country invested in African-language AI since the last Dialogue?" This introduces constructive peer pressure. Sixth, a multi-stakeholder solutions showcase. Feature concrete partnerships and pilot projects demonstrating inclusive AI governance—such as the AU-Google partnership or African-led data trusts. Success stories inspire replication and attract investment. Seventh, silent reflection and feedback walls. Provide physical and digital spaces for anonymous input, ensuring those uncomfortable speaking publicly can shape discussions. Facilitators synthesize and feed these into plenary.

Continental Frameworks The African Union Continental AI Strategy provides Africa's unified framework for ethical, development-oriented AI governance . Adopted July 2024, it focuses on five areas: harnessing AI's benefits, building capabilities, minimizing risks, stimulating investment, and fostering cooperation . It prioritizes AI applications in agriculture, education, healthcare, and climate change-sectors central to Agenda 2063 . UNESCO's AI Readiness Assessment Methodology (RAM) is deployed in 29 African countries, mapping regulatory frameworks, infrastructure gaps, and ethical considerations . Findings directly inform national strategies-Kenya's RAM provided the backbone for its National AI Strategy (2025-2030) . UNESCO is also training 15,000 government officials and 5,000 judicial workers across Africa . National Strategies and Policies Kenya's National AI Strategy (2025-2030) allocates Ksh.152 billion ($1.1 billion) for implementation, with 50% toward digital infrastructure . Developed through multi-stakeholder consultation, it balances innovation with ethical safeguards . Rwanda's National AI Policy prioritizes Kinyarwanda-language datasets, enabling citizens to interact with AI in their mother tongue . It targets healthcare, education, agriculture, and public sector governance . Data Sovereignty Initiatives The Pan-African Parliament is developing a Cybersecurity and Artificial Intelligence Model Law, building on the AU Malabo Convention . President Charumbira warns: "If we do not control the data that goes into Artificial Intelligence, we will not control the AI that shapes our future" . African universities are building an African Humanitarian and Health Data Space, ensuring ownership and control remain with African institutions . This applies FAIR data principles-Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable-within African contexts . Investment Platforms The AI 10 Billion Initiative, launched February 2026 by AfDB and UNDP, aims to mobilize $10 billion by 2035, unlock 40 million jobs, and add $1 trillion to Africa's GDP . It targets data infrastructure, skills development, and startup ecosystems . Language Inclusion Google's 1,000 Languages Initiative added 110 languages in 2024, including Ga from Ghana-part of the largest expansion of African languages to date . This demonstrates inclusion is possible but requires sustained advocacy.