Country Profile on AI Governance: Mali

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. West Africa mean 1.70 · all 54 states mean 1.76.

1. S1.1

   National AI strategy existence

   Score 1 / 4

   No standalone national AI strategy adopted as of mid-2026. AI features within the national digital transformation and e-government agenda presented at the 3rd Semaine du Numerique (Bamako, 29-31 Jan 2026).

   Note: Roadmap and ministerial discussion exist; no adopted strategy document. Treated as nascent.

   Sources oecd.ai (opens in a new tab)

2. S1.2

   Strategy adoption date

   Score 0 / 4

   N/A. No national AI strategy formally adopted.

   Note: Score 0 reflects absence of an adopted strategy.

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: none (adoption date). No formally adopted national AI strategy.

   Sources oecd.ai (opens in a new tab)

3. S1.3

   Political commitment signals

   Score 3 / 4

   Foundation stone of the Centre d'Intelligence Artificielle et de Robotique du Mali (CIAR-Mali) laid by the authorities in June 2023 at Sirakoro Niare. Ministerial statements at Semaine du Numerique 2026 framing AI as a driver of sovereignty and public-service reform.

   Note: Clear institutional action through a state-backed centre and recurring ministerial events.

   Sources magazinedelafrique.com (opens in a new tab)

4. S1.4

   Dedicated AI budget allocation

   Score 0 / 4

   No published ring-fenced budget for AI governance identified. CIAR-Mali is a capital project; no recurrent governance budget line is public.

   Note: Figure not publicly available; treated as no evidence of a dedicated allocation.

5. S1.5

   AU Continental AI Strategy alignment

   Score 1 / 4

   Mali remains an AU member and officials reference continental and Sahel-level digital ambitions. No formal alignment process with the AU Continental AI Strategy is documented.

   Note: Alignment complicated by withdrawal from ECOWAS (Jan 2025). Awareness only.

   Sources dig.watch (opens in a new tab)

6. S1.6

   Multi-stakeholder consultation

   Score 1 / 4

   The ITC FastTrackTech NTF V project convenes ecosystem actors around AI. No formal national strategy consultation process is documented.

   Note: Informal ecosystem engagement rather than a structured strategy consultation.

   Sources magazinedelafrique.com (opens in a new tab)

7. S1.7

   Sector prioritisation

   Score 1 / 4

   Public administration, culture, agriculture and security cited as AI priorities in official speeches. No strategy document with quantified sector targets.

   Note: Priorities stated rhetorically; no targets or roadmaps.

   Sources maliweb.net (opens in a new tab)

8. S1.8

   Implementation roadmap

   Score 1 / 4

   An e-government roadmap was announced at Semaine du Numerique 2026. No phased AI implementation plan with milestones is public.

   Note: Generic intent; no accountable milestones.

   Sources maliactu.net (opens in a new tab)

9. S1.9

   Monitoring and evaluation framework

   Score 0 / 4

   No M&E framework for AI strategy implementation identified.

   Note: No strategy to monitor; no framework.

10. S1.10

    Strategy review mechanism

    Score 0 / 4

    No review mechanism identified.

    Note: No adopted strategy; nothing to review.

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. West Africa mean 1.18 · all 54 states mean 1.32.

1. G2.1

   AI-specific legislation

   Score 1 / 4

   No AI-specific legislation. Regulatory needs are under discussion, including through the CIAR-Mali and APDP partnership on AI ethics.

   Note: Under discussion only.

   Sources benbere.org (opens in a new tab)

2. G2.2

   Data protection law status

   Score 3 / 4

   Law No. 2013-015 of 21 May 2013 on the protection of personal data. The APDP is operational and has issued formal compliance notices (mises en demeure) to entities; sanctions range from 5 to 20 million CFA francs.

   Note: Enacted with an operational DPA; enforcement exists but coverage and awareness remain limited.

   Sources afapdp.org (opens in a new tab)

3. G2.3

   DPA AI mandate

   Score 2 / 4

   APDP has no explicit statutory AI mandate but engages on AI through a working partnership with CIAR-Mali on data ethics and AI risks.

   Note: Formalising engagement via partnership; not a statutory AI mandate.

   Sources info360.info (opens in a new tab)

4. G2.4

   DPA staffing and budget

   Score 0 / 4

   Not publicly available.

   Note: No verified figure for APDP headcount or budget.

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

5. G2.5

   AI regulatory body existence

   Score 1 / 4

   CIAR-Mali exists as a research, robotics and ethics centre, not a statutory AI governance council or regulator. A governance framework is still being discussed.

   Note: Centre exists but is R&D-facing, not a regulatory body.

   Sources magazinedelafrique.com (opens in a new tab)

6. G2.6

   Institutional design model

   Score 1 / 4

   De facto DPA-led model anchored on the APDP, with CIAR-Mali as an emerging technical actor.

   Note: DPA-led in practice; no formal model chosen.

   Sources afapdp.org (opens in a new tab)

7. G2.7

   Malabo Convention ratification

   Score 0 / 4

   Mali has neither signed nor ratified the Malabo Convention. It does not appear on the AU status list (as of 8 Jul 2024) as a signatory or ratifying state.

   Note: Not signed and not ratified.

   Sources au.int (opens in a new tab)

8. G2.8

   Enforcement actions taken

   Score 0 / 4

   No AI-specific enforcement action identified. APDP enforcement to date concerns general data protection compliance, not AI systems.

   Note: Distinguish from data-protection enforcement, which exists.

   Sources maliactu.net (opens in a new tab)

9. G2.9

   Extraterritorial provisions

   Score 1 / 4

   APDP guidance references the extraterritorial reach of the EU GDPR and assists controllers in Mali. Domestic law does not specifically address foreign AI systems.

   Note: Partial through data-protection reach; not AI-specific.

   Sources digitaleras.net (opens in a new tab)

10. G2.10

    IP framework for AI

    Score 0 / 4

    No review of IP law for AI-generated content identified. Mali follows the regional OAPI framework.

    Note: No documented review.

Mean of the 8 scored indicators; 2 carry no score. West Africa mean 1.40 · all 54 states mean 1.51.

No score: 1 not applicable, 1 context only.

1. I3.1

   Data center count

   Score 1 / 4

   Operator-held facilities exist (Sotelma-Malitel, Orange Mali). No verified count of commercial data centres.

   Note: Limited presence; exact count not publicly verified.

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

2. I3.2

   Data center capacity (MW)

   Score 0 / 4

   No published figure.

   Note: Not available.

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

3. I3.3

   Submarine cable landing points

   ○N/A: Does not apply to this country

   Zero. Mali is landlocked. International connectivity is via terrestrial fibre to coastal landing points in Senegal, Cote d'Ivoire and Guinea.

   Note: Factual zero for a landlocked state.

   Scoring basis Not applicable; excluded from the pillar mean. Landlocked: excluded from P3 (geography is not governance).

   Sources datareportal.com (opens in a new tab)

4. I3.4

   International bandwidth (Gbps)

   Score 0 / 4

   No verified national figure.

   Note: Not available.

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

5. I3.5

   Hyperscaler presence

   Score 0 / 4

   No global hyperscaler operates local infrastructure in Mali. Access is via overseas regions.

   Note: None.

6. I3.6

   GPU/HPC access

   Score 1 / 4

   CIAR-Mali is intended to host AI and robotics compute but is not yet fully operational. Limited academic access otherwise.

   Note: Planned national capacity; presently limited.

   Sources benbere.org (opens in a new tab)

7. I3.7

   Data localisation provisions

   Score 1 / 4

   No comprehensive data localisation law. Officials have voiced intent to strengthen national data storage as part of digital sovereignty.

   Note: Rhetorical intent; no localisation statute.

   Sources maliactu.net (opens in a new tab)

8. I3.8

   Cross-border data flow framework

   Score 2 / 4

   Law No. 2013-015 regulates transfers of personal data, with APDP authorisation required for transfers abroad.

   Note: General legal framework via the data protection law.

   Sources afapdp.org (opens in a new tab)

9. I3.9

   Foreign AI surveillance spending

   ○Context only: Context flag outside the score

   Unknown. No verified figure for AI-specific surveillance procurement.

   Note: Not available.

   Scoring basis Context flag; outside the score.

10. I3.10

    Sovereign cloud initiatives

    Score 1 / 4

    Sovereign data-storage and national-network intentions announced at Semaine du Numerique 2026, jointly with AES partners. Not yet operational.

    Note: Planned, AES-aligned.

    Sources maliactu.net (opens in a new tab)

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. West Africa mean 1.14 · all 54 states mean 1.20.

1. H4.1

   AI researchers per million

   Score 0 / 4

   No verified figure.

   Note: Not available.

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

2. H4.2

   DPA staff with AI competency

   Score 0 / 4

   No verified figure.

   Note: Not available.

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

3. H4.3

   University AI programs

   Score 0 / 4

   USTTB and ENI-ABT are public scientific/technological institutions; both designated Huawei ICT Academies (Oct 2022) offering courses in AI, cloud and big data. RobotsMali has run university-level AI/NLP training and built curricula. No confirmed standalone AI/ML degree programme.

   Note: AI coursework/certification confirmed; dedicated AI/ML degree not confirmed. Verified.

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (universities). Raw value read from the evidence: "No confirmed standalone AI/ML degree programme." Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

   Sources agenceecofin.com (opens in a new tab)

4. H4.4

   African-authored AI publications

   Score 1 / 4

   No verified annual figure; output is low.

   Note: Not available.

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. 6.3 papers/yr ÷ 24.48m people = 0.26 per million (floors applied).

5. H4.5

   AI patents filed

   Score 0 / 4

   No verified figure. Patents would be filed regionally via OAPI.

   Note: Not available.

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

6. H4.6

   K-12 CS education

   Score 1 / 4

   Computer science is not mandatory nationwide. Provision is limited and uneven.

   Note: Nascent / pilot level.

7. H4.7

   AI workforce training programs

   Score 1 / 4

   Capacity-building activity through the ITC FastTrackTech NTF V project and CIAR-Mali. Government-supported programmes at scale are not evidenced.

   Note: Pilot / partner-led.

   Sources magazinedelafrique.com (opens in a new tab)

8. H4.8

   Labour transition policy

   Score 0 / 4

   No labour-transition framework for AI identified.

   Note: None.

9. H4.9

   Informal economy AI assessment

   Score 0 / 4

   No such assessment identified.

   Note: None.

10. H4.10

    African language NLP coverage

    Score 1 / 4

    Bambara has meaningful NLP support: Bayelemabaga Bambara-French corpus (approx. 47,000 pairs), MAFAND-MT, MasakhaNER 2.0, MasakhaPOS, NLLB Bambara subsets, Google SMOL (Bambara and N'ko), Maliba-AI Bambara MT dataset (2025).

    Note: At least 1 domestic language (Bambara) with meaningful NLP support; N'ko emerging. Verified.

    Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 1 of 13 (languages supported / major languages), normalised 7.7. 8% of major domestic languages.

    Sources ankataa.com (opens in a new tab)

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. West Africa mean 1.04 · all 54 states mean 1.05.

1. N5.1

   AI companies count

   Score 1 / 4

   A small number of AI-oriented startups operate within the wider digital ecosystem. No verified count.

   Note: Nascent; count not verified.

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

   Sources magazinedelafrique.com (opens in a new tab)

2. N5.2

   Private AI investment (USD)

   Score 0 / 4

   No verified figure.

   Note: Not available.

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

3. N5.3

   AI incubators/accelerators

   Score 1 / 4

   General technology incubators operate in Bamako. AI-specific incubation is limited and partner-supported.

   Note: General hubs exist; AI-focused nascent.

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

   Sources magazinedelafrique.com (opens in a new tab)

4. N5.4

   Regulatory sandbox (AI)

   Score 0 / 4

   No AI regulatory sandbox identified.

   Note: None.

5. N5.5

   Government AI procurement

   Score 1 / 4

   Government digitisation is under way but no formal AI procurement framework or domestic-preference policy is evidenced.

   Note: Ad hoc at most.

   Sources maliactu.net (opens in a new tab)

6. N5.6

   AI safety evaluation capacity

   Score 1 / 4

   CIAR-Mali provides an academic and research base. No accredited AI evaluation laboratory.

   Note: Academic research level.

   Sources benbere.org (opens in a new tab)

7. N5.7

   ISO/IEC 42001 adoption

   Score 0 / 4

   No evidence of ISO/IEC 42001 adoption.

   Note: Unknown / none.

8. N5.8

   Standards body AI competency

   Score 1 / 4

   A national standards body (AMANORM) exists. No AI-specific technical committee identified.

   Note: Standards body exists, no AI committee.

9. N5.9

   AI risk assessment frameworks

   Score 0 / 4

   No AI risk assessment frameworks identified.

   Note: None.

10. N5.10

    University-industry AI partnerships

    Score 1 / 4

    Partnerships exist around CIAR-Mali, the APDP and the ITC FastTrackTech project, at an early stage.

    Note: Informal to early formal.

    Sources info360.info (opens in a new tab)

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. West Africa mean 1.21 · all 54 states mean 1.26.

1. E6.1

   Algorithmic impact assessment

   Score 0 / 4

   Not required.

   Note: None.

2. E6.2

   Bias audit requirements

   Score 0 / 4

   Not required.

   Note: None.

3. E6.3

   Transparency obligations

   Score 1 / 4

   No AI-specific transparency rules. Data protection law imposes transparency duties on processing, which can apply to automated processing.

   Note: Indirect via data protection law.

   Sources afapdp.org (opens in a new tab)

4. E6.4

   Citizen redress mechanism

   Score 2 / 4

   Citizens can complain to the APDP regarding personal-data processing under Law 2013-015. The APDP recorded around twenty complaints in 2023.

   Note: DPA complaint route exists; not AI-specific.

   Sources benbere.org (opens in a new tab)

5. E6.5

   Judicial AI remedy

   Score 0 / 4

   No AI-related judicial precedent identified.

   Note: None.

6. E6.6

   AI advisory body diversity

   Score 1 / 4

   No formal national AI advisory body. CIAR-Mali is led by Prof Sogoba Jacqueline Konate, combining scientific and administrative expertise.

   Note: No advisory body to assess; leadership noted.

   Sources info360.info (opens in a new tab)

7. E6.7

   Global AI governance participation

   Score 1 / 4

   Limited engagement with global AI governance forums. Participation is occasional rather than as an active member.

   Note: Observer-level; recommend verification.

8. E6.8

   Civil society AI engagement

   Score 1 / 4

   Civil-society and media discussion of AI exists (for example through Benbere). No formal participation mechanism.

   Note: Ad hoc.

   Sources benbere.org (opens in a new tab)

9. E6.9

   African ethical framework reference

   Score 1 / 4

   Official discourse frames AI around national identity, cultural values and sovereignty. This is not codified into an ethical framework.

   Note: Mentioned in discourse; not codified.

   Sources maliweb.net (opens in a new tab)

10. E6.10

    Youth participation

    Score 1 / 4

    Youth engagement occurs through startup competitions and Semaine du Numerique activities. No formal governance role.

    Note: Ad hoc engagement.

    Sources maliweb.net (opens in a new tab)

Mean of the 9 scored indicators; 1 carries no score. West Africa mean 1.66 · all 54 states mean 1.55.

No score: 1 not applicable.

1. R7.1

   AU AI Strategy alignment

   Score 1 / 4

   Awareness of the AU Continental AI Strategy among officials. No formal alignment process documented.

   Note: Awareness only.

   Sources dig.watch (opens in a new tab)

2. R7.2

   Kigali Declaration endorsement

   Score 3 / 4

   No confirmation that Mali has endorsed the Kigali Declaration on AI.

   Note: Not confirmed.

   Scoring basis Official signatory list applied. Signatory of the Africa Declaration on AI (Kigali, 4 April 2025), C4IR list: "Endorsed" = 3.

   Sources c4ir.rw (opens in a new tab)

3. R7.3

   REC AI governance coordination

   Score 2 / 4

   Mali withdrew from ECOWAS on 29 Jan 2025 and is a founding member of the Alliance of Sahel States (AES), which is coordinating a joint digital and AI agenda, including the shared Semaine du Numerique.

   Note: Active within the AES bloc; outside ECOWAS.

   Sources peoplesdispatch.org (opens in a new tab)

4. R7.4

   Cross-border AI agreements

   Score 1 / 4

   AES cooperation provides a vehicle for joint digital initiatives. No specific AI governance agreement signed.

   Note: Framework exists; no AI-specific instrument.

   Sources moderndiplomacy.eu (opens in a new tab)

5. R7.5

   Election integrity AI provisions

   Score 0 / 4

   No provisions on AI in elections. The political transition has postponed elections.

   Note: None.

6. R7.6

   Disinformation response framework

   Score 1 / 4

   A cybercrime unit operates and AES communication initiatives (including AES TV) are framed as counter-disinformation tools. No AI-specific disinformation framework.

   Note: Ad hoc; not AI-specific.

   Sources africanews.com (opens in a new tab)

7. R7.7

   AI election incidents documented

   ○N/A: Does not apply to this country

   At least one documented case of AI-generated political disinformation (a Synthesia avatar video, Jan 2022). Not tied to a specific election, given the transition.

   Note: One documented political-disinformation case; see Incidents sheet.

   Scoring basis Not applicable; excluded from the pillar mean. No national election or referendum in the reference window (R7.7 rule, thresholds.csv). Listed for second-edition review: Treated as not applicable, but a constitutional referendum was held on 18 June 2023.

   Editor's note, 7 October 2026: A constitutional referendum was held on 18 June 2023, without voting in Kidal. The rule counts a referendum as a national vote. The not-applicable treatment is retained and listed for second-edition review.

   Sources constitutionnet.org (opens in a new tab) · observers.france24.com (opens in a new tab)

8. R7.8

   Platform content moderation

   Score 1 / 4

   Informal engagement at most. No formal platform content-moderation requirements for the domestic context.

   Note: Informal.

9. R7.9

   Geneva Dialogue participation

   Score 0 / 4

   No confirmed Malian delegation to the UN Global Dialogue on AI Governance.

   Note: Not confirmed.

10. R7.10

    G20/multilateral AI engagement

    Score 0 / 4

    Mali is not a G20 member. No AI-specific multilateral engagement evidenced.

    Note: Limited.

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. West Africa mean 0.63 · all 54 states mean 0.78.

1. M8.1

   AI governance budget disbursed

   Score 0 / 4

   No published figure.

   Note: Not available.

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

2. M8.2

   Health AI regulation

   Score 0 / 4

   No AI-in-health regulation identified.

   Note: None.

3. M8.3

   Health AI devices approved

   Score 0 / 4

   No verified figure.

   Note: Not available.

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

4. M8.4

   Government AI system registry

   Score 0 / 4

   No government AI registry identified.

   Note: None.

5. M8.5

   AI governance M&E reports

   Score 0 / 4

   None published.

   Note: Zero.

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (reports).

6. M8.6

   Agriculture AI governance

   Score 0 / 4

   No agriculture-specific AI governance provisions. AI-agriculture pilots are not matched by governance rules.

   Note: None.

7. M8.7

   Financial services AI governance

   Score 1 / 4

   Mali sits within the WAEMU monetary zone under the regional central bank (BCEAO). No Mali-specific AI-in-finance rules; regional fintech oversight applies.

   Note: Regional framework; no national AI-finance rule.

8. M8.8

   Education AI governance

   Score 0 / 4

   No education-specific AI governance identified.

   Note: None.

9. M8.9

   Measurable governance outcomes

   Score 0 / 4

   No evidence of measurable AI-governance outcomes.

   Note: None.

10. M8.10

    WHO AI health guidance adoption

    Score 0 / 4

    Not adopted.

    Note: None.