Wilhelmina Maria Botes

This article examines what Chile’s neurorights reforms may mean for South Africa (SA)’s legal and ethical framework. Chile is the first country to adopt an explicit constitutional and legislative response to neurotechnology, including protection for brain activity and information derived from it. Using Chile as a comparative lens, the article argues that SA does not necessarily require an immediate sui generis constitutional amendment to address neurorights-type concerns. Rather, existing constitutional protections for dignity, privacy, bodily and psychological integrity, freedom of thought and informed consent are already normatively receptive to many of the harms posed by emerging neurotechnologies. The more urgent challenge lies in timing; SA law remains largely reactive, often offering remedies only after intrusion, extraction or misuse has already occurred. The article therefore contends that protection should move upstream through proactive, risk-sensitive procedural reform and anticipatory governance, particularly in high-risk contexts involving coercion, asymmetrical power or intimate mental inference. It further argues that a neurotechnology-sensitive interpretation of existing rights, informed by local constitutional doctrine, neuroethics, and SA concerns around dignity, vulnerability and relational personhood, provides a more coherent and contextually appropriate path than immediate constitutional transplantation. The article concludes by outlining the general contours of ex ante safeguards for neurotechnology in SA while leaving open the possibility that more explicit neurorights protections may become necessary if existing doctrines prove systematically under-protective.

Background. The COVID‐19 pandemic accelerated global telehealth adoption, yet South Africa (SA) continues to face barriers owing to outdated regulations, fragmented infrastructure, and limited integration of artificial intelligence (AI). While national frameworks acknowledge the role of AI, a dedicated strategy for its implementation in healthcare is absent. This study draws on international governance frameworks and comparative policy analysis to explore pathways for inclusive and effective AI‐enabled telehealth in SA. Objectives. To assess current telehealth and AI policy landscapes in SA, identify implementation gaps, and provide actionable recommendations for aligning national strategies with international standards and healthcare needs. Methods. A qualitative policy analysis was conducted, reviewing SA regulatory instruments, including Health Professions Council of South Africa guidelines, the National AI Policy Framework and the National Health Insurance Act 20 of 2023, alongside the World Economic Forum (WEF)’s 2025 White Paper on AI in healthcare. A thematic comparative approach identified regulatory and infrastructural gaps, and proposed frameworks for sector‐specific policy advancement. No human participants were included. Results. SA’s revised Telehealth Guidelines (2021) remain restrictive and lack provisions for AI integration. The National AI Policy Framework outlines ethical AI governance but fails to detail healthcare‐specific implementation. In contrast, the WEF framework offers a phased, stakeholder‐driven model for AI adoption, emphasising data governance, digital infrastructure, and workforce training – critical elements currently missing in SA’s approach. Conclusion. A national AI‐in‐healthcare roadmap, supported by regulatory reform, a dedicated oversight body, and investment in digital infrastructure, is essential for equitable telehealth expansion. Further research should focus on scalable models for rural and underserved populations.

With emerging technologies such as genome research and the digitization of health records comes the need for new models of informed consent. In this climate of innovation people are often prone to explore the latest technological advancement as possible solutions, including for informed consent. In this paper, we present the design and evaluation of a so-called low-tech informed consent solution that was designed specifically for the informational and cultural needs of a vulnerable indigenous population, i.e., the San of South Africa. This low-tech solution took the form of a comic and, although it could enhance understanding and identification, the costs and labour intensity of comic design and the deriving limitations on its scalability should be critically considered in the light of a digitised and more standardized solution.