The Need for a Tailored AI Safety Framework in India

India is at a critical point in shaping its approach to artificial intelligence (AI) safety. On October 4, 2026, industry experts urged India to create its own AI safety framework. This framework should fit India’s unique cultural, linguistic, and technological landscape. Their call follows the recent White House Accord on Super Intelligence, signed by major US tech firms. This accord has raised concerns about whether such a model would work in India.

Experts believe that simply copying the US framework will not solve India’s specific challenges. Srikanth Velamakanni, Chairman of NASSCOM and CEO of Fractal Group, stressed that India should use its role in the Global Partnership on AI (GPAI). He wants a system that prioritizes local needs and prevents worst-case scenarios. At the same time, it should not limit access to advanced technology for Indian citizens. Amit Khanna from Grant Thornton Bharat agrees. He believes a tailored approach is necessary to align the framework with India’s socio-economic realities.

Velamakanni noted that the US model mainly encourages self-regulation among tech companies. This may not be enough to address the unique risks of AI in India. The country needs a framework that promotes innovation while ensuring safety and accountability. This includes clear guidelines for testing AI systems before they are deployed, conducting independent audits, and establishing accountability for AI-related risks. The rapid pace of AI development means these guidelines must be dynamic and adaptable for timely updates.

A report by VMS Consultants states that a strong industrial policy framework is vital for manufacturers and investors in India. This framework should ensure transparency, incident reporting, and ways to address potential harms from AI applications. Regulations must adapt to the fast-changing nature of AI development. The Ministry of Commerce and Industry (MOCI) has acknowledged the need for new legal frameworks to tackle AI challenges. Current regulations were set long before AI advanced rapidly, showing the need for updated guidelines to manage AI risks effectively.

The country needs a framework that promotes innovation while ensuring safety and accountability.

You may also like

Government & Policy

Nigel Farage questioned by standards commissioner over £5m gift

Nigel Farage, leader of Reform UK, is under investigation by the standards commissioner regarding a £5m gift from crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne. The inquiry raises…

Read More →

Involving diverse stakeholders—from tech companies to civil society organizations—is crucial for creating a comprehensive safety framework. This collaborative approach can help identify risks and develop culturally relevant mitigation strategies. Industry leaders like Amit Khanna suggest a hybrid model that combines voluntary standards with binding regulations. This would allow flexibility in fast-evolving tech areas while ensuring safety and privacy. Such a model could create a safer AI ecosystem in India while fostering innovation.

The US framework emphasizes self-policing, while the European Union has binding, risk-based regulations. Countries like Canada and Australia are also developing their own frameworks that balance innovation with safety. India can find a unique path that avoids the pitfalls of both extremes. By focusing on collaboration with all stakeholders, India can create an effective and inclusive safety framework. Ganesh Gopalan, co-founder of Gnani.ai, stressed the need for global AI models to meet the same safety standards as local ones. This is important as Indian AI companies compete with international firms. A level playing field is essential to prevent knowledge gaps and ensure fair access to AI technologies.

The call for a tailored framework also addresses urgent issues like misinformation and deepfakes. These concerns threaten social cohesion and public trust in India. Khanna pointed out that clear liability rules for AI failures are crucial to protect citizens’ rights and ensure public safety. Unlike the US framework, which may focus on corporate interests, India’s approach must prioritize its citizens’ welfare. This involves establishing formal channels for reporting harms and ensuring independent safety evaluations. Such measures would build public trust in AI technologies and encourage responsible innovation.

Unlike the US framework, which may focus on corporate interests, India’s approach must prioritize its citizens’ welfare.

Overall, developing an indigenous AI safety framework offers India a chance to lead in the global AI landscape. By tackling local challenges and fostering stakeholder collaboration, India can create a model that promotes innovation while ensuring citizen safety and well-being. As the global AI landscape evolves, the question remains: Can India create a safety framework that balances innovation with accountability? The next steps by the government and industry leaders will be crucial for the future of AI in India and its global standing.

You may also like

Government & Policy

UK Expected to Follow EU With Tariffs on Chinese EVs, Times Says

The UK government plans to impose tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, following the EU's lead. This move aims to protect local manufacturers and enhance domestic…

Read More →

The Indian government’s ongoing talks about AI regulation show a growing awareness of the need for a comprehensive safety approach. IT Secretary S Krishnan has noted that while current legal frameworks have worked, the changing AI landscape requires new regulations. As India prepares for its AI Impact Summit in February, the push for a strong AI safety framework is likely to grow. This summit could be a platform for stakeholders to work together on guidelines that reflect India’s unique context and priorities.

Furthermore, the increasing involvement of civil society, academia, and independent researchers in shaping AI policy will be vital. By ensuring diverse voices are heard, India can create a framework that is effective and equitable. The implications of India’s AI safety framework for tech startups are significant. They will need to follow stricter guidelines for testing and deploying AI technologies. This may increase operational costs but can also build trust among consumers and investors. Software engineers will need to adapt to new compliance requirements, including documentation and testing protocols. Familiarity with regulatory frameworks will be a valuable asset in the changing job market.

As the global AI landscape continues to change, the future of AI regulation in India is uncertain yet promising. The next steps by the government and industry leaders will be key in shaping AI development in the country, ensuring it aligns with the needs and values of its diverse population.

Career Ahead’s analysis shows that India’s AI safety framework will require tech startups to follow stricter guidelines for testing and deploying AI technologies.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the implications of India’s AI safety framework for tech startups?

Career Ahead’s analysis shows that India’s AI safety framework will require tech startups to follow stricter guidelines for testing and deploying AI technologies. This may lead to higher operational costs but will also build trust among consumers and investors.

How will the new AI regulations affect software engineers in AI?

Career Ahead research indicates that software engineers will need to adapt to new compliance requirements, including documentation and testing protocols. Those familiar with regulatory frameworks will have an advantage in the evolving job market.

What should AI policy experts consider when developing local frameworks?

AI policy experts must focus on India’s unique cultural and technological landscape. This includes engaging diverse stakeholders and ensuring regulations can adapt to the rapid pace of AI advancements.

You may also like

Government & Policy

Malaysia Plans First AI Law in 2027 as Scrutiny Intensifies

Malaysia is set to introduce its first AI law in 2027, addressing ethical implications and compliance requirements for AI technologies.

Read More →