Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper investigates the perspectives of Nigerian legal professionals on AI governance, focusing on ethical risks, regulatory gaps, and institutional readiness. Through semi-structured interviews and a focus group, the study identifies concerns regarding data privacy, the absence of enforceable legal frameworks, and limited institutional capacity. The research advocates for locally adapted governance models to effectively bridge the gap between global ethical principles and local realities in developing countries.
Nigeria's legal professionals reveal critical gaps in data privacy protection and AI governance frameworks, emphasizing the urgent need for context-specific regulations in developing countries.
This study examines the perception of legal professionals on the governance of AI in developing countries, using Nigeria as a case study. The study focused on ethical risks, regulatory gaps, and institutional readiness. The study adopted a qualitative case study design. Data were collected through 27 semi-structured interviews with legal practitioners in Nigeria. A focus group discussion was also held with seven additional legal practitioners across sectors such as finance, insurance, and corporate law. Thematic analysis was employed to identify key patterns in participant responses. Findings showed that there were concerns about data privacy risks and the lack of enforceable legal frameworks. Participants expressed limited confidence in institutional capacity and emphasized the need for locally adapted governance models rather than direct adoption of foreign frameworks. While some expressed optimism about AI's potential, this was conditional on the presence of strong legal oversight and public accountability. The study contributes to the growing discourse on AI governance in developing countries by focusing on the perspectives of legal professionals. It highlights the importance of regulatory approaches that are context-specific, inclusive, and capable of bridging the gap between global ethical principles and local realities. These insights offer practical guidance for policymakers, regulators, and scholars working to shape responsible AI governance in similar environments.