Moffat Mungazi
Dr Evans Sagomba
Everything AI
THE drafting of Zimbabwe’s National Artificial Intelligence Strategy (2026–2030) marks a defining moment in our nation’s digital journey.
Under the astute leadership of Information Communication Technology, Postal and Courier Services Minister, Honourable Tatenda Mavetera and Permanent Secretary, Dr Beaullah Chirume, the Ministry of ICT, Postal and Courier Services is working on delivering a blueprint that aspires, not merely to adopt new technology, but to harness it in the service of prosperity, equity and sovereignty.
This endeavour is a cause for celebration. Yet, as we salute these champions of progress, we must also acknowledge that the work of calibration and refinement is of paramount importance.
The promise of AI can only be realised if we lay down clear, coherent foundations, starting with a definition of “Artificial Intelligence” that reflects Zimbabwe’s aspirations and aligns seamlessly with continental and global standards.
A robust national strategy hinges on a precise, context-sensitive definition of AI. Vague or overly broad formulations risk sowing confusion among regulators, businesses, civil society and ordinary citizens.
They make enforcement difficult and open the door to regulatory arbitrage. Drawing inspiration from the African Union’s Continental AI Strategy, UNESCO’s Recommendation on the Ethics of AI, the European Union’s AI Act and the United Nations’ principles for trustworthy AI, Zimbabwe can craft a definition that covers three essential dimensions.
First, the technical scope must include any software or system, whether based on machine learning, logic-based approaches or statistical methods, that is designed to generate outputs encompassing predictions, recommendations or decisions.
Second, the ethical bearings of any AI system must be explicit: from the rights of data subjects and the imperative of non-discrimination to the duty of environmental stewardship.
Third, our definition must recognise societal context, honouring local languages, knowledge traditions and lived experiences while remaining interoperable with international frameworks. This tripartite approach will ensure that every AI initiative in Zimbabwe begins with a shared understanding of what falls under its ambit.
Aligning our national definition with established global frameworks is neither mimicry nor mere box-ticking. It is a strategic imperative. By mirroring the clarity found in the EU AI Act’s risk-based architecture, where systems are categorised by potential harm and regulated accordingly, while embracing UNESCO’s value-centred principles of human dignity and sustainability, we signal to partners and investors that Zimbabwe is serious about ethical innovation.
African Union’s call for sovereignty and inclusivity urges us to insist on home-grown solutions that draw on indigenous wisdom rather than foreign templates alone.
Equally, the United Nations’ emphasis on transparency and participatory design reminds us that no AI system should be deployed without meaningful stakeholder consultation.
This global coherence will unlock partnerships for research in areas such as agriculture, health and climate resilience. It will invite ethical investment from institutions that value regulatory certainty. And it will bolster our standing as a responsible actor in regional and international AI governance.
The strategic opportunities before us are vast. By engaging openly in continental forums and thought-leadership summits, Zimbabwe can share its experiences and learn from peers.
Collaborative research endeavours, whether co-developing AI-powered diagnostics that respect patient privacy or embedding machine-translation tools in underserved schools, will position our universities and tech hubs on the global stage.
At the same time, insisting on compliance checks for foreign-built AI systems will protect our digital sovereignty, ensuring that data collected in Zimbabwe remains subject to our own rigorous governance standards.
Ultimately, this alignment will demonstrate that ethical AI is not a brake on growth but a catalyst for sustainable, inclusive development.
Yet, innovation without caution invites peril. Artificial Intelligence, powerful though it is, carries risks that range from algorithmic bias and erosion of privacy to job displacement and manipulation of public opinion.
Zimbabwe’s strategy must therefore adopt a genuinely risk-based approach, modelled on the EU’s tiered framework.
Systems posing unacceptable risks, such as covert social scoring or mass surveillance, should be strictly prohibited. High-risk applications, for instance, in biometric identification or health diagnostics, must undergo rigorous impact assessments, maintain human-in-the-loop oversight and guarantee full transparency.
By contrast, AI tools with minimal risk, spam filters or simple language translation can be subject to lighter oversight, freeing innovators to experiment responsibly.
This proportionate regulation preserves room for creativity where potential harm is low, while ensuring stringent safeguards where the stakes are highest.
Public understanding and trust are indispensable if we are to navigate these risks effectively.
A people-centred AI ecosystem must equip every Zimbabwean, urban or rural, young or old, with the knowledge to appreciate both the benefits and the pitfalls of AI. Data rights, algorithmic fairness and digital self-defence are not abstract legal concepts; they affect how citizens access credit, how job applications are screened and how newsfeeds are curated.
A comprehensive AI literacy drive, delivered in local languages through community workshops, radio programmes and school curricula, will demystify the technology.
Collaborations with development partners, universities and media outlets can establish “AI observatories” at the grassroots level, empowering communities to flag unfair practices, propose local use cases and monitor deployments.
Online toolkits and helplines will guide individuals facing automated decisions in finance, healthcare or social services, ensuring that redress is accessible and transparent.
Ethical stewardship must also be entrenched within our institutional architecture.
I would recommend the establishment of an independent AI Ethics and Governance Council, comprising representatives from government, academia, industry, civil society and youth organisations.
This body will oversee mandatory ethical impact assessments for all high-risk AI systems, with public reporting requirements to guarantee accountability.
National legislation should enshrine robust data protection and algorithmic transparency clauses, drawing on best practice from the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation and UNESCO’s data governance guidelines.
To incentivise socially conscious innovation, research grants must favour AI projects that demonstrably advance social justice, promote environmental sustainability or preserve cultural heritage.
Such measures will ensure that AI serves the public interest rather than deepening inequalities.
Embedding human-centred values into every stage of AI development is equally vital.
We must resist technocratic impulses that treat technology as an end in itself. Instead, AI should function as an amplifier of Zimbabwe’s strengths: our spirit of community, our rich linguistic diversity and our tradition of resourceful problem-solving.
Inclusive participation in policy-making, especially involving women, youths, persons with disabilities and rural communities, will guarantee that no voice is marginalised.
Incorporating indigenous knowledge systems into AI design will not only enrich the technology but also reaffirm our cultural identity in the digital age.
This process demands continuous dialogue, interdisciplinary research and ongoing refinement of ethical guidelines to keep pace with technological advancement.
Translating this vision into reality requires a clear, sequenced roadmap. First, a comprehensive AI definition should be published, emerging from broad public consultations and parliamentary hearings. Concurrently, existing laws, covering data protection, privacy and consumer rights, must be audited against the requirements of the EU AI Act, UNESCO recommendations and the African Union’s strategy to identify gaps and harmonise legislation.
Next, a pilot risk-assessment exercise, established in collaboration with leading universities, can classify and test high-risk applications, refining regulatory guidelines in a controlled environment.
Simultaneously, a national AI literacy campaign, partnering with media houses, tech hubs and rural development officers, will spread digital empowerment from Harare to Hwange.
Finally, the creation of an AI ethics fellowship will nurture local expertise and engage the diaspora in mentoring roles, ensuring that Zimbabwe builds a cadre of home-grown specialists capable of steering the nation through future challenges.
To Minister Mavetera and Dr Chirume, Honourable Commissioner, Dr Engineer Martin Muduva (ZHRC), Professor Tawanda Mushiri (SIRDC), Engineer Leonard Jukwa (MICTPCS), Dr Tendai Zengeni (AU) and Mrs Loveness Ngwanga (MICTPCS/AG).
I wish to extend my warmest congratulations on driving the drafting of the National AI Strategy.
As global norms evolve, so too must Zimbabwe’s approach, continuously refining definitions, updating risk models and deepening citizen engagement.
This is not a one-off exercise but an ongoing journey of dialogue, experimentation and adaptation.
Zimbabwe’s AI future is ours to shape. Let us seize this moment with the boldness that has defined our past, guided by ethical clarity and a steadfast commitment to human dignity.
By grounding our strategy in a unified, internationally aligned definition of AI, adopting a proportionate, risk-based regulatory framework, and centring the needs and rights of every citizen, we can ensure that technology remains a tool for empowerment rather than a force of exclusion.
Let us continue to build a strong foundation, listening widely, thinking deeply and acting decisively, to ensure that our nation does not merely ride the wave of AI, but leads with integrity, humanity and pride.
About the Author: Dr Evans Sagomba is a Doctor of Philosophy and Chartered Marketer (CMktr, FCIM) with an MPhil and PhD in Philosophy. He specialises in AI, Ethics, and Policy Research, and is an AI Governance and Policy Consultant. His expertise extends to Ethics of War and Peace, Philosophy of Development, and Political Philosophy. [email protected]. ORCID: 0009-0007-0681-0329. Social media handles; LinkedIn; @ Dr. Evans Sagomba (MSc Marketing) (FCIM)(MPhil) (PhD) X: @esago
Online Reporter