Sens Orbit Company

Success isn't about more high-level "principles"—we have enough of those. Real success for the Global Dialogue on AI Governance means moving from talking about "inclusion" to actually sharing the tools of the trade. For me, the dialogue is a win only if it bakes the African Union's Continental AI Strategy directly into the global rulebook. Here is what that looks like in practice: 1. Hard Infrastructure, Not Soft Promises We talk a lot about "capacity building," but you can't build AI on a laptop with patchy power. Success is a concrete Global AI Fund that builds data centers and compute power on the continent. If the dialogue doesn't lead to Africa owning its own "digital factories," it's just another talk shop. 2. Digital Sovereignty as a Right AI shouldn't be a one-size-fits-all export. A successful outcome is a global agreement that respects Digital Sovereignty. This means our data stays ours, and AI systems are optimized for our languages and cultural nuances. We aren't just "users"; we are creators, and the AU's focus on local data is the only way to avoid digital colonization. 3. A Unified Regulatory Market The "splinternet"—where every country has different rules—kills startups. Success means Regulatory Interoperability. By implementing the AU's push for a unified framework, we ensure a developer in Kigali can scale to Cairo without needing a hundred lawyers.  The AU Strategy is our manifesto. If global policy doesn't reflect it, it's not governance—it's someone else's agenda. We must implement these AU pillars into our national laws now so we show up to Geneva with a plan, not just a wish list.

• Social, economic, ethical, cultural, linguistic and technical implications of AI
• Protection and promotion of human rights
• Interoperability of governance approaches
• Safe, secure and trustworthy AI

In my view, the first Global Dialogue on AI Governance will only be a success if we move past the technical jargon and focus on how this technology actually hits the ground in our communities. I've chosen these four priorities because they represent a shift from being spectators to being architects of our own digital future. 1. Why I prioritize Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy AI I believe trust is the only way we get real adoption. If a farmer in Benin or a small business owner in Nigeria doesn't feel their data is safe, they won't use the tools. For me, "trustworthy" means the system does what it says it will do, consistently and securely. We can't build a digital economy on a foundation that people are afraid of. 2. My focus on Social, Economic, and Linguistic Implications AI shouldn't feel like an imported product that doesn't "get" us. I advocate for this because I want to see AI that speaks Yoruba, Swahili, or Wolof-tech that understands our social nuances and actually solves our specific economic hurdles. If it doesn't reflect our culture and language, it's just another form of digital colonization, and I'm committed to making sure that doesn't happen. 3. Why I push for Interoperability I've seen how hard it is for brilliant African startups to scale when every country has a different set of rules. By pushing for governance approaches that "talk" to each other, I'm looking to cut the red tape. I want a developer in Cotonou to be able to launch in Nairobi without needing a small army of lawyers. Interoperability is about opening doors for our innovators. 4. Why Human Rights are non-negotiable for me At the end of the day, technology must serve people, not the other way around. I believe our policies must have human dignity as their north star. Whether it's preventing bias or ensuring fairness, I want to make sure that as we race toward the future, we don't leave our fundamental values behind. To me, these aren't just policy points-they are the guardrails that ensure AI actually empowers us.

In my opinion, even with the solid pillars we've discussed, there are a few "elephant in the room" issues that could make or break our progress in Africa. These aren't just technical hurdles; they're the real-world realities I see every day. 1. The Power and Plug Problem We can have the best AI policies in the world, but they don't mean much if the power keeps cutting out. To me, you can't talk about AI governance without talking about Energy and Infrastructure. If we aren't building the data centers and the sustainable power grids to run them right here on the continent, we're just building a house with no foundation. I believe true "Digital Sovereignty" starts with owning the "engine room"-the hardware and the electricity. 2. Digital Extractivism I'm really concerned about what I call "Data Mining 2.0." Most global AI is trained on Western data, and I worry that Africa is becoming a place where raw data is harvested, processed elsewhere, and then sold back to us as a finished product. We need to focus on Local Data Commons. We should be the ones curating datasets that reflect our informal markets, our oral histories, and our unique ways of doing business. If the data isn't ours, the "intelligence" won't be either. 3. Room to Breathe (The "Sandbox" Idea) Law usually moves at a snail's pace while tech moves at warp speed. My take is that we need Regulatory Agility. I want to see "Sandboxes"-safe zones where a brilliant young developer in Cotonou or Lagos can test an AI health app without being buried under a mountain of paperwork before they even launch. If we're too rigid too early, we'll accidentally crush the very "AI Sprinters" we're trying to cheer on. In my view, adding these to the conversation ensures we aren't just reacting to AI, but actually building the capacity to own its future.

In my opinion, the gaps between our high-level strategies and the reality on the ground are creating a "make or break" moment for the tech sector in West Africa. The Challenges: Crossing the "Compliance Chasm" The biggest hurdle I see is the shift from aspirational strategies to enforceable laws, like Nigeria's National Digital Economy and E-Governance Bill expected this month. While I advocate for safety, the "grace period" for startups is ending. We now face heavy fines and personal liability for executives if we don't meet strict data localization and audit requirements. For a small firm in Cotonou or Lagos, the cost of staying compliant can feel like a "tax on innovation." Additionally, the infrastructure gap remains a massive bottleneck; we are talking about AI governance, but our data centers are still largely offshore, costing the region hundreds of millions annually.  The Opportunities: Claiming our Digital Agency Despite these hurdles, I see an incredible opening for Digital Sovereignty. The move toward local AI-ready data centers—like the ones launching in Lagos this year—means we can finally host our own data and build models that actually understand our languages and markets. This is our chance to stop being "data exporters" and start being "solution owners." The push for Regulatory Interoperability across the AU is also a game-changer for our sector. It's creating a path for a "unified African market," where a single successful pilot in Benin could more easily scale across the continent. In my view, if we can bridge these governance gaps by supporting our "AI Sprinters" with regulatory sandboxes and local infrastructure, we won't just be following global trends—we'll be setting them.

In my opinion, the Global Dialogue on AI Governance shouldn't just be another high-level summit; it needs to be the place where we move from "talking at" each other to actually "working with" each other. For Africa, this is our chance to ensure that international cooperation isn't just a one-way street. Here is the role I believe the Dialogue should play: 1. Synchronizing the Rules of the Road Right now, we risk a "splinternet" where every region has its own complex laws. I see the Dialogue as the perfect stage to push for Regulatory Interoperability. By aligning global standards with the AU's Continental AI Strategy, we can ensure that an "AI Sprinter" in Cotonou or Lagos doesn't have to hire a dozen lawyers just to launch an app in Europe or Asia. It's about creating a unified market where our innovation can actually scale. 2. Moving from "Aid" to "Infrastructure" I believe the Dialogue can shift the conversation from vague "capacity building" to real Resource Equity. We don't just need training; we need the "digital factories"—the local data centers and compute power—that the AU strategy calls for. International cooperation should mean sharing the actual tools of the trade, not just sending over "best practice" PDFs. 3. Protecting our Digital Voice Finally, this Dialogue is where we take a stand for Digital Sovereignty. I want to see a global commitment to protecting local data and supporting AI that speaks our languages and understands our social nuances. Cooperation only works if it respects our right to build AI that reflects our reality, not a version of the future exported from somewhere else. In short, the Dialogue is our opportunity to make sure the global "AI rulebook" is co-authored by Africa, ensuring a future that is inclusive, ethical, and—most importantly—fair.

In my opinion, the Global Dialogue on AI Governance shouldn't try to reinvent the wheel. Instead, it should act as a "super-connector" for the powerful initiatives already transforming the African tech landscape. 1. Strengthening Existing Foundations The Dialogue should build directly upon the African Union's Continental AI Strategy (2024) and the Smart Africa alliance. These aren't just documents; they are active networks of 39+ countries working on "Blueprints" for everything from AgTech to ethical regulations. By connecting with these, the Dialogue gains immediate access to a unified African voice rather than negotiating with 55 individual states.  2. Scaling "Open for Good" Partnerships We should leverage successful models like the GIZ "FAIR Forward" initiative, which has already done the heavy lifting in creating open-source datasets for African languages (like the Lanfrica project). The Dialogue can add value by taking these local success stories and turning them into global standards for Linguistic Sovereignty, ensuring that AI everywhere respects local languages.  3. Implementing the "AI Sprinters" Roadmap The Dialogue can also connect with private-sector frameworks like the Google AI Sprinters program. I've seen firsthand how this helps bridge the gap between complex code and government policy. The added value of the Global Dialogue would be to turn these "corporate" best practices into Global Public Goods, making sure the tools for "leapfrogging" development are available to everyone, not just those with the biggest budgets. The Added Value The real "win" of the Dialogue is interoperability. It can take these scattered initiatives and weave them into a single global framework. This means a startup in Cotonou doesn't just follow "Beninese rules" or "African rules," but is part of a Global AI Governance Roadmap that protects our rights while letting our innovation scale to the world.

In my opinion, the success of the Global Dialogue on AI Governance in Geneva depends entirely on making sure everyone has a seat at the table—not just as observers, but as active contributors. For me, this means moving beyond the "government-only" model and embracing a truly multistakeholder approach. 1. The Role of Stakeholders: Beyond the Usual Suspects I believe every group has a specific "superpower" to bring to the Dialogue: • Governments: Their job is to turn the AU Continental AI Strategy into national law. I want to see them creating the "Regulatory Sandboxes" that let our startups innovate safely. • Private Sector & Startups: I've seen how "AI Sprinters" can leapfrog development. Their role is to provide the real-world data and technical expertise to ensure policies aren't just theoretical. • Civil Society & Academia: They are our "ethical compass." I rely on them to protect human rights and ensure AI respects our linguistic and cultural diversity. 2. Recommendations for Format: Practical and Inclusive To me, a successful structure should look like this: • Hybrid "Hub-and-Spoke" Model: We shouldn't just meet in Geneva. I recommend regional "pre-summits" (like the ones held in Addis Ababa or Abuja) so that local voices are captured before the global meeting. • The "IPCC for AI" Track: I want to see a dedicated stream for the Independent International Scientific Panel on AI. We need policy based on shared, objective facts, not just geopolitical posturing. • Interactive "Policy Hackathons": Instead of just long speeches, let's have sessions where policymakers and developers co-create "Regulatory Blueprints." This makes the Dialogue an incubator for solutions, not just a talk shop. In my view, if we structure the Dialogue this way, we ensure that the global "AI rulebook" isn't just written for Africa, but with Africa.

In my opinion, the global "AI table" is still missing the very people whose lives are being most quietly transformed by these technologies. If we don't fix this, we risk building a future that works for a few but ignores the many. The Underrepresented Voices 1. The Informal Sector & Micro-Entrepreneurs: Over 80% of Africa's workforce operates in the informal economy. These traders, farmers, and artisans are using AI-driven mobile money and logistics every day, yet their unique needs—like simplified tax compliance or non-traditional credit scoring—are rarely a priority in high-level governance talks.  2. Indigenous Language Communities: Most AI is trained on "Global North" data. I believe we are dangerously underrepresenting the millions who speak Yoruba, Wolof, or Amharic. Without their input, we aren't just losing data; we're losing the cultural nuance that makes AI actually useful in our local contexts.  3. The "Supply-Chain" Laborers: From data labelers in Kenya to content moderators across the continent, the people doing the "dirty work" of making AI safe for global giants are almost never in the rooms where the safety rules are written. How to Include Them I advocate for a "Bottom-Up" approach that aligns with the AU's Continental AI Strategy: • Community-Led Data Commons: We should support initiatives that allow local communities to own and govern their own datasets, ensuring their language and traditions aren't just "harvested" but respected. • Hyper-Local "Pre-Summits": Before Geneva 2026, we need town-hall style gatherings in regional hubs. These should translate complex policy into local languages to get real feedback from the informal sector. • Incentivizing "AI Sprinters": We must create Regulatory Sandboxes specifically for startups solving local problems. Their lived experience is the best "policy input" we have.  In my view, inclusion isn't just about sending an invite—it's about making the conversation relevant to the person on the street.

In my opinion, Speed Mentoring is one of the most practical and high-impact formats the AI Dialogue could adopt. I've seen firsthand how powerful it is—like at SAFEN 2026 in Cotonou—for breaking down the walls between high-level policy and real-world execution. Here's why I believe this format is a game-changer for the Global Dialogue: 1. Breaking the "Hierarchy" Barrier Traditional summits can feel very "top-down." Speed Mentoring flips the script. In my view, having a Minister of ICT sit across from a 22-year-old AI Sprinter from a tech hub in Abuja for a 15-minute "lightning round" is invaluable. It forces policymakers to hear the raw, unpolished challenges of building AI in Africa—like data costs or erratic power—straight from the source. 2. Rapid Knowledge Transfer We don't have years to wait for "capacity building" programs to trickle down. Speed Mentoring allows for a rapid exchange of Regulatory Blueprints and technical "know-how." For me, it's about the "how-to," not just the "what." A startup founder gets strategic advice on navigating international standards, while the policymaker gets a crash course in how their laws actually affect a real business. 3. Humanizing the AU Strategy The AU Continental AI Strategy can feel like a dense document until you discuss it one-on-one. Speed Mentoring makes it relatable. It's where "Interoperability" becomes a conversation about how a developer can scale their app from Benin to Côte d'Ivoire. It turns abstract goals into personal "Action Plans." 4. Building "Inclusive" Networks For the communities we often miss—like women in tech or rural innovators—this format is a doorway. It's not just about "mentoring"; it's about Sponsorship. I've seen these 15-minute chats turn into long-term professional partnerships that directly support the AU's goal of a diversified, African-led AI ecosystem. In my view, if the Geneva Dialogue includes a dedicated Speed Mentoring Pavilion, we won't just leave with a signed treaty—we'll leave with a global network of people ready to actually build the future.

In my opinion, the only way the 2027 Global Dialogue on AI Governance succeeds is if it stops treating Africa as a "future market" and starts treating us as a current power player. My work as an AI and Cloud consultant at Upskill Universe puts me directly in the room with policymakers across the continent through UNECA and the African Union, and I've seen firsthand that the gap between "policy" and "practice" is where the real battle is won. 1. Merging Strategy with the "Engine Room" In my training sessions, I advocate for the AU Continental AI Strategy as our "North Star" for Digital Sovereignty. But a strategy is just paper without the "engine room" provided by the Google AI Sprinters Framework. I teach policymakers that "leapfrogging" isn't a buzzword-it's a technical roadmap involving cloud-first infrastructure and massive upskilling. If the Global Dialogue doesn't focus on the actual hardware and data centers the AU strategy calls for, we're just building a house with no foundation. 2. The Power of "Regulatory Sandboxes" Through my work with the AU and UNECA, I've seen how rigid laws can accidentally crush a brilliant startup before it even launches. I believe the most effective "best practice" is the Regulatory Sandbox. This allows our "AI Sprinters" in sectors like AgTech or Healthcare to test their tools in a safe zone. It's about being "pro-innovation" while staying "pro-safety," and it's the only way to ensure our local talent stays on the continent. 3. Training for "Inclusive" Governance I've trained leaders from Cotonou to Nairobi, and my message is always the same: AI must speak our languages and reflect our values. By weaving the AU's focus on Linguistic Sovereignty into the practical tools of the Sprinters framework, we ensure that the AI of the future understands a Yoruba trader just as well as a Silicon Valley engineer. In my view, the Global Dialogue must adopt this "consultant's mindset"-focusing on the how just as much as the why.