AFRICA MUST HAVE SEAT AT TABLE SHAPING GLOBAL AI RULES, SAP EXECUTIVE SAYS
The emerging architecture of artificial intelligence governance cannot be built without Africa’s active participation in its design, according to Sunil Geness, director of global government affairs and corporate social responsibility for Africa at SAP. His assertion comes as international institutions move to formalize how AI development and deployment will be regulated across borders and sectors.
This week, leading governments and organizations announced the AI for Good Global Commission, a body intended to expand access to artificial intelligence technology, strengthen public confidence in its use, and increase its measurable social and economic impact. The commission assembles representatives from government institutions, private sector organizations, and multilateral bodies to identify concrete mechanisms for releasing AI’s potential while ensuring that access and benefits are distributed equitably, rather than concentrated among wealthy nations and corporations.
The commission’s first formal meeting will convene during the International Telecommunication Union’s AI for Good Global Summit, scheduled for July 7 through 10 in Geneva. That summit sits within the broader Digital Week framework running July 6 through 10, which also includes the first United Nations-mandated Global Dialogue on AI Governance and the WSIS Forum 2026. The convergence of these events signals the urgency with which international institutions are treating AI governance as a priority requiring coordinated policy action.
Geness, who will participate in the Geneva summit, framed Africa’s role not as a passive recipient of rules set elsewhere but as an active architect of the governance frameworks that will shape AI’s development globally. He emphasized that the continent must enter these negotiations with strategic clarity about its own interests and priorities. “Africa must meet that room with clarity, not caution. Our agenda should be simple and bold: AI governance that expands prosperity,” he said. “That means compute access, skills investment, trusted data systems, open standards, local-language innovation, accountable public procurement, and regulation that protects people without suffocating entrepreneurs.”
The specific elements Geness identified reflect both economic and governance concerns. Compute access addresses the infrastructure gap that prevents African institutions from developing and deploying AI systems domestically. Skills investment acknowledges that governance frameworks are only effective when the workforce exists to implement them. Trusted data systems and open standards speak to institutional capacity and interoperability. Local-language innovation recognizes that AI systems trained primarily on English and other dominant languages will not serve African populations effectively. Accountable public procurement and protective regulation address the governance dimension directly, establishing that any rules adopted must subject government and corporate actors to oversight while preserving space for entrepreneurial activity.
Geness identified a critical near-term objective: converting the African Union’s Continental AI Strategy from a policy document into concrete national implementation roadmaps, investment pipelines, and mechanisms for regional cooperation. “This is technology diplomacy: 54 nations aligning where they can, rather than negotiating as 54 separate voices. This is where I hope to add value,” he said. The framing reflects an institutional challenge that affects Africa’s influence in global governance more broadly. Fragmented national interests can be outmaneuvered by coordinated blocs, whereas aligned continental strategy can exercise meaningful leverage.
Africa’s institutional position within the commission has been strengthened by the appointment of Rwandan President Paul Kagame as co-chair, serving alongside Salesforce Chair and Chief Executive Officer Marc Benioff. This appointment ensures that African governance interests are represented at the commission’s highest decision-making level, rather than relegated to advisory or secondary roles.
Meanwhile, the International Telecommunication Union has stated that the commission’s core mandate includes promoting equitable access to AI technology and narrowing the global digital divide. The ITU estimates that approximately 2.2 billion people remain without internet connectivity, representing roughly one quarter of the global population and excluding them from AI-driven economic opportunities and services. “A key focus of the AI for Good Global Commission will be to bridge digital divides and help ensure that AI becomes a tool for solving global challenges, not deepening inequalities,” the organization said.
Kagame articulated the governance principle underlying this mandate. “Technology is supposed to be a force for good, and we have a responsibility to use it accordingly,” he said. “Let us work together to reduce inequality and allow more of our citizens to benefit from the good AI can deliver to all of us.” His framing positions technology governance as a matter of institutional responsibility and collective obligation, not market choice.
Benioff emphasized that public trust functions as a prerequisite for AI’s economic potential to be realized. “The promise of AI is built not only on incredible opportunities for economic growth, but on the foundation of trust required for our shared success,” he said. Without public confidence in how AI systems are deployed and regulated, resistance and regulatory backlash can constrain the technology’s adoption and economic benefit.
ITU Secretary-General Doreen Bogdan-Martin, serving as vice chair of the commission, stressed that effective governance requires coordination across institutional sectors. “No organisation can single-handedly put AI at the service of all humanity,” she said. “It will take collective leadership and the combined expertise of partners across sectors to ensure AI benefits everyone, everywhere.”
The commission’s work reflects a broader institutional recognition that AI governance cannot be left to market forces or individual national regulators acting in isolation. The coordination of government institutions, international organizations, and private sector actors signals that AI governance is being treated as a matter of public policy requiring formal institutional architecture. Whether the African Union’s Continental AI Strategy can be translated into binding national roadmaps before the Geneva frameworks are set will determine how much of that architecture Africa actually shapes.