Towards Regulation of App-Based Health Data in Africa

By Edrine Wanyama |

Digital health technologies are reshaping healthcare delivery across Africa. App-based systems now connect patients, clinicians, pharmacies, laboratories, and public health agencies, creating new opportunities to improve access, efficiency, and coordination of care. At the same time, they generate large volumes of highly sensitive health data, much of it moving across platforms, providers, and in some cases, national borders.

A new Policy brief by the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) examines the critical need for robust governance of app-based health data in Africa.

The brief highlights significant health data governance gaps, which include the lack of health-specific AI regulation, fragmented legal, policy and institutional frameworks, and the unresolved distinction between wellness tracking and clinical care. These gaps fundamentally undermine health data handling and management standards, with flaws in consent, accountability, and cross-border data management requirements.

Across the continent, digital health applications now span multiple functions within health systems, from clinical management systems and electronic medical records (EMR) platforms to pharmaceutical logistics and supply chains. Alongside these systems, AI-enabled and specialist care platforms are expanding diagnostic and treatment capacity. Patient-facing applications are also expanding, particularly in chronic care, maternal health, and home-based services.

While these innovations are improving access to services and efficiency, they also introduce significant governance risks. Health data is among the most sensitive categories of personal data, capable of revealing medical history, reproductive health, mental health status, and genetic information. In app-based systems, this data is often processed by multiple actors, including developers, health providers, cloud infrastructure providers, and third-party analytics firms, many of which are not visible to users.

In practice, consent is often weak or poorly understood, data sharing arrangements are opaque, and users have limited visibility or control over the use of their information. This creates risks not only to privacy, but also to trust in digital health systems.

These risks are compounded by fragmented legal and institutional frameworks. Although many countries have enacted data protection laws and digital health policies, enforcement remains uneven and coordination between health ministries, data protection authorities, and digital regulators is often weak. This creates a persistent governance gap between the rapid expansion of app-based health systems and the capacity of institutions to regulate them effectively.

At the continental level, emerging frameworks such as the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and global guidance such as the World Health Organization (WHO) Digital Health Strategy set important normative directions for secure, rights-respecting health data governance. However, translating these commitments into enforceable national systems remains limited, particularly in relation to interoperability, cross-border data flows, and platform accountability.

The brief calls for the adoption of a strategic governance architecture grounded in seven data governance principles, namely:

  1. Data sovereignty that reflects African public health priorities, democratic oversight and defined accountability mechanisms;
  2. Cross-border data flows where adequate and comparable safeguards exist and support reciprocal recognition arrangements among Data Protection Authorities (DPAs);
  3. Consent, purpose limitation, and data minimisation that enable individuals to make informed decisions about participation and ensure secondary uses are subject to transparency and safeguards;
  4. Interoperability and standardisation of systems to ensure integration and portability;
  5. Governance of AI-based health tools that require algorithmic impact assessments, independent audits and ongoing monitoring;
  6. Equity and inclusion to ensure systems do not further exclude vulnerable and marginalised communities; and
  7. Accountability and institutional coordination through clear allocations of responsibilities across institutions, consistent oversight, enforcement, and compliance monitoring.

The principles are consistent with the CDC Health Data Governance Framework. Together with other continental instruments, they can support a harmonised, rights-respecting and secure health data governance in Africa.

The brief presents recommendations for various stakeholders which, if implemented, could foster a progressive and trustworthy digital health ecosystem in Africa. Among theses include:

For the African Union and Regional Bodies

  • Support implementation of the Africa CDC Continental Health Data Governance Framework through clear timelines, monitoring mechanisms, knowledge sharing platforms, and technical assistance for member states.
  • Develop a continental health-app certification framework, recognised across participating jurisdictions, covering consent requirements, interoperability standards, cybersecurity safeguards, data governance obligations, and algorithmic accountability.
  • Facilitate regional data trust zones through reciprocal recognition agreements among Data Protection Authorities, enabling secure and accountable cross-border health data flows for disease surveillance, research collaboration, and pandemic preparedness.

For National Governments and Health Ministries

  • Enact or strengthen health-specific data governance legislation that addresses the full data lifecycle in app-based health systems, including consent, purpose limitation, data minimisation, retention, breach notification, and cross-border transfers.
  • Establish regulatory sandboxes to assess the safety, effectiveness, and governance implications of emerging digital health technologies before large-scale deployment.

For  Data Protection Authorities

  • Conduct risk-based audits and impact assessments of high-impact health applications, including privacy, security, and algorithmic fairness, where AI systems are deployed.
  • Develop sector-specific guidance on the processing of health, biometric, and demographic data, including standards for research use, secondary use, and commercial processing.
  • Enter into reciprocal recognition arrangements with counterpart DPAs across Africa to support coordinated enforcement and trusted cross-border data flows.

For Health Service Providers

  • Formalise data processing agreements with health app vendors and third-party processors, including provisions on security, breach notification, audit rights, and liability.
  • Strengthen workforce capacity through regular training on health data governance, cybersecurity, incident reporting, and the responsible handling of sensitive health information.
  • Implement strong authentication, access-control, and encryption measures to protect patient information throughout its lifecycle.

For App Developers and Platform Operators

  • Embed privacy-by-design and security-by-design principles throughout the development, deployment, and operation of health applications.
  • Provide clear and accessible consent mechanisms that enable users to understand and control how their health data is collected, shared, retained, and reused.
  • Conduct regular testing and independent assessments of digital health tools to identify and address bias, accuracy concerns, and performance disparities across African populations.

For Health Service Consumers and App Users

  • Exercise rights over personal health data, including rights of access, correction, portability, and deletion where provided under applicable legal frameworks.
  • Use health applications that comply with relevant regulatory requirements and recognised data protection standards.
  • Report suspected data breaches, misuse of personal information, or harmful automated decision-making outcomes to relevant regulators and oversight bodies.

Please read the full Policy Brief here.

Protecting Children Online in Africa Must Move from Policy to Practice

By Patricia Ainembabazi |

Child online safety has returned to the forefront of digital governance discussions across Africa and globally. New regulatory initiatives from the United Nations, the African Union, and industry coalitions reflect growing concern about the risks children face in increasingly digital societies. Yet, while policy commitments are multiplying, implementation continues to lag.

The challenge is particularly acute in Africa, where internet access is expanding rapidly while child protection systems struggle to keep pace. As more children go online, they are increasingly exposed to cyberbullying, online grooming, sexual exploitation, harmful content, privacy violations, and emerging Artificial Intelligence (AI)-enabled risks such as disinformation and misinformation.

Just last month, the United Nations Human Rights Office called for stronger regulation and government oversight, publishing 10 key points to make platforms safer for children, urging technology companies to embed child safety into their product design and address the growing risk posed by AI. This reflects a broader shift in global digital policy. The Global Digital Compact has committed states to strengthen legal and policy frameworks for children’s rights in digital spaces and to prioritise national online child safety policies and standards by 2030.

At the continental level, the African Union Child Online Safety and Empowerment Policy of 2024 sets out principles on children’s safety and privacy, and participation to guide member states in developing national strategies, while the Global System for Mobile Communications Association (GSMA), UNICEF, and partners recently launched the Africa Taskforce on Child Online Protection to strengthen coordination among governments, mobile operators, technology companies, regulators, law enforcement, civil society, and young people.

Some African countries are already taking steps to strengthen child protection online. Rwanda is considering restrictions on social media access for children under 16, while Zimbabwe recently approved a National Child Online Protection Policy for 2026–2030 aimed at addressing online sexual exploitation, cyberbullying, grooming, harmful content, sextortion, and privacy violations.

These developments reflect a broader global shift in approaches to child online safety. Australia has legislated to restrict social media access for children under 16, while the United Kingdom recently concluded a national consultation examining age-based protections and enforcement mechanisms. Across several countries, governments, regulators, and civil society organisations are increasingly calling on technology companies to strengthen safeguards and take greater responsibility for protecting children online.

A broader strategy would expand efforts to ensure that while policies and frameworks on child protection are being developed, children are involved. This would help them understand the several platforms available for use, associated risks, pressures, and opportunities for digital life. The Africa Taskforce on Child Online Protection recognises this mode of participation and has now included youth representatives by integrating their voices for a child-centered digital future in Africa. Replicating this approach at the national level, through wide youth consultations, school-based dialogues, child-friendly policy forums, and participatory design of reporting and safety tools, will foster a healthy digital environment for the young.

It is against this backdrop that the Digital Rights Alliance Africa (DRAA) report, “Child Protection and Safety Online in Africa: The Law, Privacy, Challenges and Solutions, provides crucial, ground-level evidence across 10 countries – Algeria, Botswana, Egypt, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, Rwanda, South Africa, Tanzania, and Uganda. It highlights the gaps in child safety and protection online despite technological advancement and expansion.

The report highlights several recommendations that could help foster child safety and protection online, which are directed to different stakeholders, including the government, civil society organisations, international organisations, development partners, the technology sector, media, academia, parents, and the general community, and among others include;

  1. Parliaments should enact specific national laws that protect children’s privacy and safety in digital spaces, with clear safeguards tailored to children’s particular vulnerabilities, such as cyberbullying, grooming, online sexual exploitation, image-based abuse, harmful content, misuse of children’s data, profiling, and age-inappropriate design.
  2. Governments should invest in the implementation of national strategies that set out the roles of government agencies, the judiciary, data protection authorities, law enforcement actors, educators, parents, and the private sector in protecting children in the digital age.
  3. Platforms and telecom companies should design child-friendly products and services, minimise the collection and retention of children’s data, introduce age verification and parental controls, publish transparency reports, and submit protection measures to independent audits.
  4. The media should monitor, document, and report objectively, and expose all cases of online child abuse and demand accountability from the responsible parties.
  5. Civil society organisations should engage in advocacy, awareness raising, legal reform, evidence-based research, and documentation of issues affecting child safety online in order to demand and push for accountability of all the relevant stakeholders.
  6. All stakeholders must ensure that children are meaningfully included in innovation and programming, and that children and young people are actively engaged as participants in discussions, collaborations, and co-design of digital solutions.

Ultimately, for children to stay online, measures must go beyond mere policy expressions and aspirations as reiterated in the Global Digital Compact’s 2030. Laws and frameworks specific to child protection and safety online should be developed and stringently implemented. Moreover, digital service providers must be held accountable, and other stakeholders, including parents, schools, and communities, should join efforts to ensure that children are empowered to safely utilise digital technologies.

CIPESA and partners continue to advocate for rights-respecting policies that advance children’s protection, participation, access, and safe use of digital technologies, while calling on technology companies to embed these principles in platform design, governance, and accountability systems.

Overview of CIPESA Policy Submissions to International Bodies and Governments

By CIPESA Writer |

Africa’s digital rights landscape is evolving rapidly, shaped by new legislation, emerging technologies, and recurring threats to civic space. CIPESA has remained actively engaged in documenting these developments, including through the annual State of Internet Freedom in Africa reports and through broader programming.

Over the last few months, we have made submissions to various international bodies and national governments, filed legal interventions, and provided expert commentary to advance internet freedom, digital inclusion, and democratic governance.

Below is an overview of our key submissions and commentaries in recent months.

Engaging Global Bodies on Technology Governance

Submission on How the WHO Digital Health Strategy Should Govern Data, Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI): In March 2026, CIPESA submitted recommendations to the World Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for Africa on the development of the Global Digital Health Strategy for 2028–2033, urging that the strategy be anchored on human rights, equity, and accountability. CIPESA warned that most AI systems used in African healthcare are trained on non-African datasets, increasing risks of inaccurate diagnoses and exclusions, and called for mandatory “explainability” standards, equity impact assessments, and domestic investment in digital health infrastructure.

Recommendations to the OHCHR: Also in March, CIPESA submitted to the UN Human Rights Council under Resolution 58/23 on the risks digital technologies pose to human rights defenders in Africa. The submission examined legal and policy developments, tech-facilitated attacks including against women HRDs, AI-related risks, and challenges facing civil society and companies, while recommending stronger corporate measures to identify, assess, and prevent harm to HRDs. CIPESA submitted comments and recommendations on due diligence and improved responses to digital technology-related risks faced by human rights defenders.

Engaging National Governments on Digital Legislation Commentary on Zimbabwe National AI Strategy: The Southern African state recently adopted its National AI Strategy 2026–2030 (AI strategy)  to guide its digital technology and transformation. The strategy aims to accelerate development, enhance industrialisation, and improve service delivery in sectors such as health, finance, agriculture, education and public administration. The strategy also emphasises building local data infrastructure as opposed to relying on foreign data storage infrastructure while promoting an AI governance approach grounded in Ubuntu, human rights, accountability, transparency and inclusivity. However, an important question is whether Zimbabwe’s approach offers useful lessons for other African countries developing national AI strategies. Find our commentary here.

Submission on the Uganda AI and Emerging Technologies Strategy: In March 2026, CIPESA submitted recommendations to Uganda’s National AI and Emerging Technologies Strategy Taskforce, welcoming the country’s ambition to harness AI for development while cautioning that innovation must be matched with legal, institutional, and ethical safeguards. Find a commentary here.

CIPESA called for a rights-by-design approach including mandatory Human Rights Impact Assessments for high-risk AI systems, algorithmic transparency, local data representation, and meaningful civil society participation in shaping Uganda’s AI strategy.

Outpaced by Its Own Ambition: Can Kenya Bridge Its AI Regulation Gap? This commentary highlighted the raw paradox at the heart of Kenya’s AI, noting that the country is simultaneously sprinting ahead in AI adoption while grappling with a shrinking space for the very digital voices that AI empowers. A key remains between ambition and readiness as the country ranks 93rd in the 2025 Government AI Readiness Index, due to persistent weaknesses in infrastructure, implementation, and institutional capacity. Find a commentary here.

Submission to the White Paper on ICT Tax Reduction in Uganda: A year ago, CIPESA submitted a position paper to the National Task Team on Enhancement of Government Revenue from the ICT Sector at the Uganda Ministry of ICT and National Guidance. The paper benchmarked Uganda’s ICT sector tax policies, licensing fees, and regulatory regimes against those of Kenya, Rwanda, and Tanzania. Since then various developments have emerged which inform the ICT tax regime in Uganda including the April 2026 passing of the Value Added Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2026, which rejected the controversial government proposal to impose an 18 percent tax on imported software after lawmakers warned it would undermine the country’s digital transformation agenda.

Engaging the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR)

ACHPR Resolution 630 on Monitoring Technology Companies: In March 2025, the ACHPR adopted Resolution 630, a timely step toward holding technology companies accountable for information integrity in Africa. CIPESA welcomed the move, contributed recommendations across key regional forums, and looks forward to strengthening the newly developed guidelines through the review process.

Prioritising Human Rights Defenders: CIPESA reviewed the Draft Declaration on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights Defenders in Africa, which seeks to help restore civic space for the effective protection of human rights. In its submission to the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders and Focal Point on Reprisals in Africa, CIPESA highlighted the draft’s strengths, weaknesses, and gaps, and offered practical recommendations to align it with continental and global standards, particularly the 1998 UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders. Find the submission here

Supporting the Ratification of the AU Disability Protocol: CIPESA has consistently called upon African Union member states to ratify the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Africa. Our submission to the ACHPR Working Group on the Rights of Older Persons and People with Disabilities in Africa (April 2022) argued that ratification is a matter of utmost priority and that without it, the digital rights of persons with disabilities across the continent remain inadequately protected.

Contributing to the Universal Periodic Review (UPR)

Joint Stakeholder Submission on Tanzania’s Digital Rights Record: Ahead of Tanzania’s fourth cycle UPR before the UN Human Rights Council set to take place in November 2026, CIPESA, alongside the Pan African Lawyers Union (PALU) and JamiiAfrica, submitted a joint stakeholder report documenting the state of digital rights in the country.

While acknowledging positive developments including the enactment of the Personal Data Protection Act, 2022, and reforms to the Media Services Act, the submission highlighted persistent concerns: the use of vague laws to suppress online expression, the blocking of platforms including Clubhouse, X, and JamiiForums, a nationwide internet shutdown during the 2025 general elections, and the escalating threat of Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence (TFGBV) against women journalists and activists.

The submission called on Tanzania to repeal or amend vague and overly broad laws, comply with international human rights standards on internet access, establish judicial oversight over surveillance, and invest in digital rights literacy.

Rwanda’s fourth cycle UPR review: Rwanda had its UPR review in January 2026 where following the November 2025 pre-session in Geneva, several permanent missions expressed eagerness to advance strong recommendations for Rwanda, and CIPESA’s evidence and recommendations were expected to inform their engagement during the formal review.

A joint submission by CIPESA and the Association for Progressive Communications (APC) noted that digital technologies have expanded the avenues through which women are targeted, often enabling harm that is faster, more pervasive, and harder to remedy.

Rwanda’s UPR presented a timely opportunity to adopt meaningful, future-focused reforms that uphold human rights, ensure accountability, and create a digital environment where all citizens, especially women, can participate safely, freely, and equally.

Since the review, the Rwandan government has noted they would undertake national consultations with relevant stakeholders to assess the recommendations and determine its position.

Liberia’s fourth cycle UPR review: CIPESA, in collaboration with the West Africa ICT Action Network (WAICTANET), submitted a joint stakeholder submission for Liberia’s consideration during the 50th session of the UPR. The joint submission observed that, although Liberia has taken preliminary steps towards aligning its domestic legal and policy framework with applicable regional and international human rights standards, substantial legal, institutional, and enforcement gaps persist. It called for the Government to adopt comprehensive data protection and cybersecurity legislation; safeguard the right to freedom of expression online; ensure accountability for violations against journalists, human rights defenders, and online actors; strengthen transparency and effective access to information; and implement targeted measures to bridge the digital divide.

Malawi’s fourth cycle UPR review: A joint submission was made by CIPESA alongside the The Centre for Human Rights and Rehabilitation (CHRR), the International Press Institute (IPI), the University of Birmingham, and Small Media, on digital rights in Malawi. The submission recommended law reform, full implementation of the Access to Information Act, affordable and inclusive internet access, independent oversight for digital rights violations, operationalisation of the Data Protection Act, protection of encryption, and safeguards against unlawful spyware use.

Looking Ahead

Across these engagements with the ACHPR, the Universal Periodic Review of the UN Human Rights Council, the WHO, and national governments in Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, and Zambia, CIPESA’s work reflects a consistent commitment to promoting inclusive and effective use of ICT in Africa for improved governance and livelihoods.As the digital governance landscape continues to shift, our submissions serve as a continued resource for policymakers, civil society, the media and other entities committed to advancing internet freedom in Africa.

CIPESA Annual Report 2025 Highlights Agility in A Changing Funding and Policy Landscape

By CIPESA Writer |

The Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) is pleased to present its 2025 Annual Report. Made possible by a wide network of collaborators across Africa and beyond, our work reflects a year marked by agility, resilience, and responsiveness amid rapid shifts in technology, policy, and governance.

Across Africa, governments rapidly expanded the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI), including national digital ID systems, surveillance tools, and e-government platforms, reshaping how power is exercised, services are delivered, and citizens engage with the state. At the same time, digital platforms remained central to political and civic life, amplifying both civic participation and manipulation.

Through our research, advocacy, and partnerships, the report highlights how digital transformation is reshaping everyday life and why protecting civic space and digital rights remains more important than ever.

Over the year, our work moved beyond who participates in digital governance across Africa to strengthening the quality and influence of that participation. We are deeply grateful to all our Network of allies whose support made our 2025 work possible.

In a year marked by significant shifts in the global funding landscape, their continued trust and commitment to digital rights in Africa was both enabling and affirming.

We remain committed to advancing an open, inclusive, and rights-respecting digital ecosystem in Africa, confident that when evidence, advocacy, and collective action come together, meaningful change is possible. Read more on the report below.

CIPESA Annual Report 2025

Zimbabwe’s National AI Strategy: Policy Lessons for Africa

By Edrine Wanyama |

Zimbabwe recently adopted its National Artificial Intelligence (AI) Strategy 2026–2030 (AI strategy)  to guide digital technology and transformation in the country. The strategy aims to accelerate development, enhance industrialisation, and improve service delivery in sectors such as health, finance, agriculture, education and public administration. The strategy emphasises building local data infrastructure as opposed to relying on foreign data storage infrastructure while promoting an AI governance approach grounded in Ubuntu, human rights, accountability, transparency and inclusivity.

However, an important question is whether Zimbabwe’s approach offers useful lessons for other African countries developing national AI strategies.

Lessons for Other African Countries

The country’s AI strategy is organised around six pillars that together map a practical path for AI adoption and deployment. First, AI talent and capacity development is essential for ensuring that institutions have the skills needed to implement AI effectively. Second, AI infrastructure and computational sovereignty are necessary for ensuring digital and data sovereignty. Third, AI adoption and service transformation are critical for supporting the integration of AI across public and private sectors to improve their productivity, accountability and transparency.

The fourth pillar, AI governance, ethics and regulation, is essential for building public trust and creating a framework that supports responsible innovation. The fifth pillar, AI research, development, and innovation, can drive investments, expand knowledge production and strengthen academic output. The sixth pillar, strategic international collaboration, presents an opportunity for global partnerships with key players and stakeholders, technology exchange, and potentially greater investment.  

Consequently, these pillars offer useful lessons for other countries seeking to harness AI for socio-economic transformation while protecting data rights and data sovereignty.

Alignment with the African Union (AU) AI Strategy

Zimbabwe’s AI Strategy reflects several priorities contained in the AU Continental Artificial Intelligence Strategy, particularly the emphasis on coordinated AI governance, digital sovereignty, and sectoral innovation. Zimbabwe’s strategy aims to harmonise the deployment and use of AI across sectors such as health, finance, agriculture, education and public administration through common governance benchmarks for AI governance. If implemented effectively, these goals could help to address digital neo-colonialism, an issue that has been dominant in Africa’s technological space.

The Strategy also places strong emphasis on AI as a tool for socio-economic development, aligning with Agenda 2063 and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly in sectors such as health, agriculture, and education. The Strategy promotes the deployment of AI to improve agriculture through crop disease prevention, as well as mining and mineral development, which is consistent with the AU AI strategy’s priorities on resource optimisation and climate resilience.

However, Zimbabwe faces significant governance and implementation challenges. The country scored 0 in the 2024 Global Index on Responsible AI Governance, highlighting the gap between policy ambition and institutional readiness. This means it requires major actions to implement the strategy, such as the establishment of robust legal safeguards, accountability mechanisms, oversight institutions, and rights-based governance frameworks, which are also emphasised within the AU strategy.  Other African countries can draw lessons from Zimbabwe’s approach, such as the need to complement AI strategies with stronger governance capacity, clearer regulatory safeguards, and more coherent data governance frameworks to support responsible and accountable AI deployment.

UNESCO Guidance on AI

The UNESCO Recommendations on Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, adopted in 2021, is a global normative framework that promotes human rights, including human dignity, transparency, fairness, human oversight in AI systems, and democratic participation. It also provides practical policy action areas covering issues such as data governance, gender, education and research, health, and social wellbeing.

While the UNESCO Guidance is emphatic on ethical and privacy considerations, Zimbabwe’s strategy falls short. Ambitions to integrate AI into public service delivery sectors such as education, health, and public administration will require stronger safeguards to ensure alignment with the human-centric principles articulated in the UNESCO framework. In the age of AI, data security concerns, intellectual property rights, algorithmic bias, and institutional accountability are central to responsible deployment of AI and require clearer policy and regulatory attention.

Similarly, the UNESCO Guidance warns against the use of AI in a manner that undermines democratic participation, civic engagement, and collective decision-making. This is especially important in contexts where surveillance technologies such as facial recognition, drone monitoring, communication tracking, and social media surveillance are deployed without clear safeguards or independent oversight. Zimbabwe, like several other African countries, has invested in AI-enabled infrastructures, such as the “smart city” systems to monitor and surveil citizens in ways that are opaque and lack clear accountability mechanisms.

As African countries continue developing national AI strategies and governance frameworks, they must strive to ensure that the deployment of AI is transparent, publicly accountable, and pays close attention to ethical and human rights standards. Without these safeguards, AI risks reinforcing exclusion, surveillance, and digital authoritarianism rather than advancing development.

Conclusion

Zimbabwe’s adoption of an AI Strategy is an important step toward advancing tech-enabled digital and socio-economic transformation. It also reflects the country’s intent to align national priorities with the African Union’s vision for AI-driven development across the entire continent. However, for such strategies to be effective and legitimate, they must be grounded in ethical and human rights standards laid down in regional and international benchmarks.