Country Profile on AI Governance: South Sudan

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. East Africa mean 1.56 · all 54 states mean 1.76.

1. S1.1

   National AI strategy existence

   Score 0 / 4

   South Sudan does not have a dedicated national AI strategy or policy It is in the early stages of building the digital and regulatory foundations needed for AI, but formal strategy development is not yet evident.

   Sources mail.lawgratis.com (opens in a new tab)

2. S1.2

   Strategy adoption date

   Score 0 / 4

   As no national AI strategy exists, there is no adoption date.

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

3. S1.3

   Political commitment signals

   Score 2 / 4

   There are clear signals of political commitment. The Minister of Information, Communication, and Technology has publicly affirmed the country's commitment to AI and digital transformation resolutions. An undersecretary has articulated a vision for AI investment and infrastructure development at international forums.

   Note: While formal statements have been made, this has not yet translated into a formal strategy or dedicated institutional action on AI governance.

   Sources africa-press.net (opens in a new tab)

4. S1.4

   Dedicated AI budget allocation

   Score 0 / 4

   No evidence of a dedicated budget for AI governance.

5. S1.5

   AU Continental AI Strategy alignment

   Score 1 / 4

   By participating in regional forums like the East African Community meetings on AI and signing the Smart Africa Declaration on digital economy and AI, South Sudan demonstrates awareness of regional and continental digital agenda South Sudan’s Ministry of Information and the Media Authority are working to enact forward-looking AI regulations. This aligns with the AU’s call for risk-based, localized AI oversight and data privacy framework

   Note: Alignment is at an awareness level, with no formal plan for integration yet.

   Sources africa-press.net (opens in a new tab)

6. S1.6

   Multi-stakeholder consultation

   Score 0 / 4

   As a strategy has not been developed, formal consultations on an AI strategy have not occurred. A 2024 report noted gaps in public participation in AI policy across the region, including in South Sudan

   Sources itedgenews.africa (opens in a new tab)

7. S1.7

   Sector prioritisation

   Score 0 / 4

   While officials have mentioned potential benefits for sectors like agriculture and healthcare, a national strategy does not exist to formalize these as priorities.

   Sources mail.lawgratis.com (opens in a new tab)

8. S1.8

   Implementation roadmap

   Score 0 / 4

   N/A - No strategy or roadmap exists.

9. S1.9

   Monitoring and evaluation framework

   Score 0 / 4

   N/A - No framework exists.

10. S1.10

    Strategy review mechanism

    Score 0 / 4

    N/A - No mechanism exists

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. East Africa mean 1.28 · all 54 states mean 1.32.

1. G2.1

   AI-specific legislation

   Score 1 / 4

   No AI-specific law exists. However, the National Communication Authority (NCA) is developing guidelines for AI and Machine Learning to address technologies beyond the scope of current laws. This indicates the topic is under active discussion at the regulatory level

   Note: The Cybercrimes and Computer Misuse Bill (2024) is also before parliament but primarily addresses cybercrime rather than AI specifically

   Sources radiotamazuj.org (opens in a new tab)

2. G2.2

   Data protection law status

   Score 1 / 4

   South Sudan does not have an enacted data protection law. The Transitional Constitution (2011) guarantees privacy (Article 22) , but a comprehensive legal framework is absent. A draft Data Protection Bill has been developed by stakeholders and is under parliamentary discussion

   Note: A Data Protection Authority (DPA) is expected to be established once the law is enacted

   Sources theradiocommunity.org (opens in a new tab)

3. G2.3

   DPA AI mandate

   Score 0 / 4

   As the Data Protection Authority has not been established yet, it has no mandate, AI-specific or otherwise

   Sources theradiocommunity.org (opens in a new tab)

4. G2.4

   DPA staffing and budget

   Score 0 / 4

   Not applicable, as the Data Protection Authority does not currently exist.

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (FTE staff).

5. G2.5

   AI regulatory body existence

   Score 1 / 4

   While there is no dedicated AI body, the NCA is taking initial steps by developing AI guidelines and considering the regulatory implications of AI . This can be considered a proposal for regulatory action on AI. South Sudan does not currently appear to have a dedicated AI law or a published national AI strategy. In practice, AI is governed indirectly through the Transitional Constitution, communications law, cybercrime and computer misuse measures, public law and sector oversight

   Note: No formal AI council or governance body has been established.

   Sources levellers.ai (opens in a new tab)

6. G2.6

   Institutional design model

   Score 0 / 4

   As there is no formal AI governance framework, no specific institutional model has been designated yet.

7. G2.7

   Malabo Convention ratification

   Score 1 / 4

   South Sudan is listed among the countries that have signed the African Union Convention on Cyber Security and Personal Data Protection (Malabo Convention) . However, it is not listed among the 16 countries that have ratified it

   Sources dig.watch (opens in a new tab)

8. G2.8

   Enforcement actions taken

   Score 0 / 4

   No evidence of AI-specific enforcement actions could be found. The general legal framework for data and cyber enforcement is weak and not yet operationa

   Sources digitalrights.ngo (opens in a new tab)

9. G2.9

   Extraterritorial provisions

   Score 0 / 4

   Existing laws, such as the Cybercrimes and Computer Misuse Provisional Order (2021), are domestic in nature. There is no evidence of consideration for extraterritorial provisions for foreign AI systems.

10. G2.10

    IP framework for AI

    Score 0 / 4

    South Sudan's intellectual property laws are weak and rely heavily on legislation inherited from Sudan. There is no evidence of any review or amendment process to address AI-generated content

Mean of the 7 scored indicators; 3 carry no score. East Africa mean 1.54 · all 54 states mean 1.51.

No score: 1 not scored (excluded from the mean), 1 not applicable, 1 context only.

1. I3.1

   Data center count

   Score 1 / 4

   There is at least one active commercial data center in South Sudan

   Note: The market report indicates there are 5-10 local and regional internet service providers

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 1 (data centres).

   Sources pulse.internetsociety.org (opens in a new tab)

2. I3.2

   Data center capacity (MW)

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   The total data center power capacity in megawatts is not specified in available sources

   Note: Potential DC power costs are estimated at $0.20–$0.35/kWh

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

   Sources inflect.com (opens in a new tab)

3. I3.3

   Submarine cable landing points

   ○N/A: Does not apply to this country

   South Sudan is a landlocked country and has no submarine cable landing points of its own. It connects to international cables via fiber and satellite links to neighboring countries

   Note: Nearest landing points for the EASSy cable are in Mombasa (Kenya) and Port Sudan (Sudan)

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

   Sources international.djiboutitelecom.dj (opens in a new tab)

4. I3.4

   International bandwidth (Gbps)

   Score 1 / 4

   As of February 2016, MTN South Sudan's international bandwidth was 250 Mbps. More recent aggregate data is unavailable in search results

   Note: Internet connectivity has historically been low. A 2017 ITU report noted international bandwidth per internet user was just 0.4 kbit/s. This score is a placeholder based on the only found data point.

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. 0.25 Gbps ÷ 11.94m = 0.02 Gbps per million. Raw value read from the evidence: "MTN South Sudan's international bandwidth was 250 Mbps" [2016, single operator; 250 Mbps = 0.25 Gbps]. Listed for second-edition review: The raw value is a single operator's bandwidth from February 2016.

   Sources africabandwidthmaps.com (opens in a new tab)

5. I3.5

   Hyperscaler presence

   Score 0 / 4

   There is no evidence that global cloud providers like AWS, Microsoft Azure, or Google Cloud have local infrastructure (data centers). Liquid Intelligent Technologies, a Microsoft Gold Partner, offers cloud services but likely uses regional infrastructure

   Sources liquid.tech (opens in a new tab)

6. I3.6

   GPU/HPC access

   Score 0 / 4

   No public information suggests the availability of GPU or HPC resources for AI research or commercial use.

7. I3.7

   Data localisation provisions

   Score 0 / 4

   There is no evidence of general or sector-specific data localisation requirements in South Sudan.

8. I3.8

   Cross-border data flow framework

   Score 0 / 4

   There is no evidence of a specific legal framework for cross-border data transfers.

9. I3.9

   Foreign AI surveillance spending

   ○Context only: Context flag outside the score

   No information on this specific metric could be found.

   Scoring basis Context flag; outside the score.

10. I3.10

    Sovereign cloud initiatives

    Score 1 / 4

    While no specific "sovereign cloud" is mentioned, a 2,400-km national fiber backbone is planned for construction starting December 2025, which is a prerequisite for such initiatives

    Sources africabandwidthmaps.com (opens in a new tab)

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. East Africa mean 1.18 · all 54 states mean 1.20.

1. H4.1

   AI researchers per million

   Score 0 / 4

   No specific estimate for the number of AI researchers per million is available. South Sudan is a young nation with a developing AI ecosystem, and such metrics are likely not formally tracked yet.

   Note: The first IndabaX South Sudan event occurred in July 2025, highlighting the ecosystem is in early stages

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

   Sources sceniushub.com (opens in a new tab)

2. H4.2

   DPA staff with AI competency

   Score 0 / 4

   Data Protection Authority (DPA) has not yet been established in South Sudan. There is no standalone data protection law, and the National Communication Authority (NCA) oversees information protection and data privac

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

   Sources mail.lawgratis.com (opens in a new tab)

3. H4.3

   University AI programs

   Score 0 / 4

   The University of Juba's Department of Computer Science offers a Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Computer Science with courses in artificial intelligence and machine learning. The department also operates an AI Lab

   Note: The program includes practical training in AI, ML, and data science. Dr. Felix Gonda, a Harvard-educated specialist, is setting up an AI lab and teaching AI courses ther

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (universities). Raw value read from the evidence: "Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Computer Science with courses in artificial intelligence and machine learning" [CS degree with AI courses, not a dedicated AI. Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

   Sources juba-university.com (opens in a new tab)

4. H4.4

   African-authored AI publications

   Score 1 / 4

   There is no documented evidence of published, peer-reviewed AI research with South Sudanese institutional affiliations. A 2026 academic paper on AI in surgical care was conducted in neighboring Sudan, not South Sudan

   Note: Research output is likely very limited.

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. 1.0 papers/yr ÷ 11.94m people = 0.08 per million (floors applied). Raw value read from the evidence: "There is no documented evidence of published, peer-reviewed AI research with South Sudanese institutional affiliations." [source used: not named]. Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

   Sources sciencedirect.com (opens in a new tab)

5. H4.5

   AI patents filed

   Score 0 / 4

   There is no evidence of any AI-related patents filed in South Sudan.

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (AI patent applications/year). Raw value read from the evidence: "There is no evidence of any AI-related patents filed in South Sudan." Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

6. H4.6

   K-12 CS education

   Score 0 / 4

   No search results confirm the existence of a K-12 computer science curriculum in South Sudan.

   Scoring basis Descriptor label mapped to a score. Fellow wrote "(None)" to "None" (position 0 of 5 labels to 0). parentheses removed.

7. H4.7

   AI workforce training programs

   Score 1 / 4

   There is no evidence of a government-supported AI workforce training program. The Ministry of ICT and NCA are focused on foundational infrastructure (e.g., data center construction, cybersecurity bills) . Ministry of Information & Telecommunication Initiatives: The government is collaborating with the World Bank to integrate AI training into upcoming digital trade and youth development projects. These efforts are designed to expand foundational AI literacy alongside fiber-optic infrastructure rollouts National Youth Union (SSNYU) Training: Implemented in partnership with the Ministry of Youth and Sports, programs like the Y-BRIDGE Academy have trained young representatives nationwide to use AI tools for practical applications like research, documentation, and proposal writing.

   Sources en.tatoli.tl (opens in a new tab)

8. H4.8

   Labour transition policy

   Score 0 / 4

   South Sudan does not currently have a dedicated AI policy or formal legal framework for labor market transition. Governance relies instead on the Transitional Constitution and ICT legislation, while the government focuses on foundational digital infrastructure and Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) to prepare its workforce

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

9. H4.9

   Informal economy AI assessment

   Score 0 / 4

   South Sudan has not conducted a specific, formal assessment on how AI impacts its informal economy. However, the government acknowledges the need for digital readiness and is focusing on foundational infrastructure, such as expanding fiber optic networks, to prepare its youth for future digital trade.

   Sources onecitizendaily.com (opens in a new tab)

10. H4.10

    African language NLP coverage

    Score 3 / 4

    Nuer, Dinka, and Acholi were integrated into Google Translate in 2023 after a five-year effort led by Dr. Isaac Gang. There are plans to integrate 10–20 more languages using the same process

    Note: Dr. Gang's keynote detailed the process and called for volunteers to support the expansion of language inclusion in AI tools

    Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 2 of 3 (languages supported / major languages), normalised 66.7. 67% of major domestic languages.

    Sources sceniushub.com (opens in a new tab)

Fellow-assigned pillar score. Indicators not scored. East Africa mean 0.97 · all 54 states mean 1.05.

No score: 10 not scored (excluded from the mean).

1. N5.1

   AI companies count

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

2. N5.2

   Private AI investment (USD)

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

3. N5.3

   AI incubators/accelerators

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

4. N5.4

   Regulatory sandbox (AI)

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

5. N5.5

   Government AI procurement

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

6. N5.6

   AI safety evaluation capacity

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

7. N5.7

   ISO/IEC 42001 adoption

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

8. N5.8

   Standards body AI competency

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

9. N5.9

   AI risk assessment frameworks

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

10. N5.10

    University-industry AI partnerships

    ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

    No verified evidence found

    Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

Fellow-assigned pillar score. Indicators not scored. East Africa mean 1.16 · all 54 states mean 1.26.

No score: 10 not scored (excluded from the mean).

1. E6.1

   Algorithmic impact assessment

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

2. E6.2

   Bias audit requirements

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

3. E6.3

   Transparency obligations

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

4. E6.4

   Citizen redress mechanism

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

5. E6.5

   Judicial AI remedy

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

6. E6.6

   AI advisory body diversity

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

7. E6.7

   Global AI governance participation

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

8. E6.8

   Civil society AI engagement

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

9. E6.9

   African ethical framework reference

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

10. E6.10

    Youth participation

    ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

    No verified evidence found

    Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

Score of the only scored indicator; 9 carry no score. East Africa mean 1.54 · all 54 states mean 1.55.

No score: 8 not scored (excluded from the mean), 1 not applicable.

1. R7.1

   AU AI Strategy alignment

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

2. R7.2

   Kigali Declaration endorsement

   Score 3 / 4

   No verified evidence found

   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

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

4. R7.4

   Cross-border AI agreements

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

5. R7.5

   Election integrity AI provisions

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

6. R7.6

   Disinformation response framework

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

7. R7.7

   AI election incidents documented

   ○N/A: Does not apply to this country

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not applicable; excluded from the pillar mean. No national election or referendum in the reference window (R7.7 rule, thresholds.csv).

8. R7.8

   Platform content moderation

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

9. R7.9

   Geneva Dialogue participation

   ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

   No verified evidence found

   Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

10. R7.10

    G20/multilateral AI engagement

    ○Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

    No verified evidence found

    Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. East Africa mean 0.94 · all 54 states mean 0.78.

1. M8.1

   AI governance budget disbursed

   Score 0 / 4

   Evidence withheld. The profile text for this indicator is identical to Uganda's profile, with the country name changed, and is not verified for South Sudan.

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Listed for second-edition review: The evidence text is identical to Uganda's profile and is not verified for South Sudan.

2. M8.2

   Health AI regulation

   Score 2 / 4

   Evidence withheld. The profile text for this indicator is identical to Uganda's profile, with the country name changed, and is not verified for South Sudan.

   Scoring basis Listed for second-edition review: The evidence text is identical to Uganda's profile and is not verified for South Sudan.

3. M8.3

   Health AI devices approved

   Score 0 / 4

   No authorisation of an AI-enabled medical device or software by the Drug and Food Control Authority was found. The Authority's website publishes no product or device register.

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

   Editor's note, 7 October 2026: The profile text was copied from Uganda's profile and is removed. The score of 0 is consistent with the corrected evidence.

   Sources dfcasouthsudan.org (opens in a new tab)

4. M8.4

   Government AI system registry

   Score 0 / 4

   Evidence withheld. The profile text for this indicator is identical to Uganda's profile, with the country name changed, and is not verified for South Sudan.

   Scoring basis Listed for second-edition review: The evidence text is identical to Uganda's profile and is not verified for South Sudan.

5. M8.5

   AI governance M&E reports

   Score 0 / 4

   Evidence withheld. The profile text for this indicator is identical to Uganda's profile, with the country name changed, and is not verified for South Sudan.

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Listed for second-edition review: The evidence text is identical to Uganda's profile and is not verified for South Sudan.

6. M8.6

   Agriculture AI governance

   Score 2 / 4

   Evidence withheld. The profile text for this indicator is identical to Uganda's profile, with the country name changed, and is not verified for South Sudan.

   Scoring basis Listed for second-edition review: The evidence text is identical to Uganda's profile and is not verified for South Sudan.

7. M8.7

   Financial services AI governance

   Score 3 / 4

   Evidence withheld. The profile text for this indicator is identical to Uganda's profile, with the country name changed, and is not verified for South Sudan.

   Scoring basis Listed for second-edition review: The evidence text is identical to Uganda's profile and is not verified for South Sudan.

8. M8.8

   Education AI governance

   Score 2 / 4

   Evidence withheld. The profile text for this indicator is identical to Uganda's profile, with the country name changed, and is not verified for South Sudan.

   Scoring basis Listed for second-edition review: The evidence text is identical to Uganda's profile and is not verified for South Sudan.

9. M8.9

   Measurable governance outcomes

   Score 3 / 4

   Evidence withheld. The profile text for this indicator is identical to Uganda's profile, with the country name changed, and is not verified for South Sudan.

   Scoring basis Listed for second-edition review: The evidence text is identical to Uganda's profile and is not verified for South Sudan.

10. M8.10

    WHO AI health guidance adoption

    Score 3 / 4

    Evidence withheld. The profile text for this indicator is identical to Uganda's profile, with the country name changed, and is not verified for South Sudan.

    Scoring basis Listed for second-edition review: The evidence text is identical to Uganda's profile and is not verified for South Sudan.