Information Compliance in 2026: What Should Be on Your Radar
- Grant
- 2 hours ago
- 4 min read
Information Compliance (IC) has moved to the centre of how businesses operate. It’s now a critical part of governance, risk management, and day-to-day operations across every sector. Organisations that treat it as essential rather than optional are the ones protecting their reputation, avoiding penalties, and building trust with clients and stakeholders.
At its core, IC refers to the legal, governance, and operational frameworks that ensure personal and sensitive information is collected, used, stored, shared, and protected lawfully, ethically, and accountably across the organisation.
It extends beyond complying with privacy legislation to supporting control, accountability, and oversight, particularly when information is misused, lost, or exposed.
2026: The Compliance Turning Point
The shift did not happen overnight.
In 2023 and 2024, enforcement activity escalated significantly with regulators taking action and expecting demonstrable compliance. This included fines of up to ZAR 5 million against public bodies, alongside enforcement notices and compulsory remedial actions.
2025 became the exposure year. Many organisations discovered – often uncomfortably – that their compliance frameworks did not reflect how information is actually used inside the business. Shadow AI, remote working models, third-party platforms, and fragmented governance structures widened the gap between policy and practice.
2026 is where consequences land. Regulators now expect organisations to prove that compliance is active, governed, and effective – not just that they are trying. This year is about enforcement, accountability, and evidence.
Enforcement is Accelerating
One of the most important realities for 2026 is that enforcement is no longer reactive.
Regulators are increasingly initiating investigations proactively, demanding documentary proof of compliance, and assessing governance failures rather than only responding to breaches.
For organisations, this means that compliance must be visible, structured, and ongoing. You need to be able to show who is responsible, what controls exist, how risks are tracked, and how issues are escalated and addressed.
Intentions and good faith efforts are no longer enough. Evidence matters.
Boards Cannot escape Accountability
Another critical shift heading into 2026 is the growing focus on board and executive accountability.
Information Compliance does not sit solely at operational level. Boards are expected to exercise oversight over information and privacy risk in the same way they do over financial, operational, and reputational risk.
This means that compliance should feature meaningfully in board packs, risk registers, annual workplans, and governance calendars. Directors are expected to ask informed questions and ensure that appropriate appointments, delegations, and reporting lines are in place.
Where this does not happen, silence can be interpreted as a lack of oversight – and ignorance will not hold up as a defence.
The Unmapped Shadow AI Risk
One of the fastest-growing compliance blind spots is Shadow AI i.e. the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools by employees without formal approval, governance, or safeguards.
In many organisations, employees are already uploading personal or confidential information into AI tools, using AI to draft emails, reports, contracts, and HR documentation, and relying on AI-generated outputs to make decisions.
This creates immediate IC risks;
Personal information might be processed unlawfully.
Data might be transferred outside approved jurisdictions.
Records of processing might be incomplete or inaccurate.
Accountability becomes unclear.
The challenge is that Shadow AI rarely looks malicious. It looks efficient and helpful – and often goes unnoticed.
Regulators will not be concerned with whether AI use improved productivity, but rather with whether it was lawful, controlled, and governed.
AI makes Paper Compliance Obsolete
Policies that exist only on paper are increasingly disconnected from reality.
As AI tools become embedded in day-to-day work, regulators are asking harder questions, including:
Who approved the tools being used?
What data is being fed into them?
How are outputs reviewed and validated?
How are staff trained on acceptable use?
What happens when something goes wrong?
Organisations are often exposed not because they have nothing in place, but because what they do have does not operate in practice.
Living compliance now requires active registers, enforced policies, modern training, tested incident response plans, and clear escalation paths that people actually understand and use effectively.
If AI use is not reflected in your compliance framework, that framework is already outdated.
The Cyber-AI-Compliance Nexus
One of the defining features of 2026 is the collapse of silos. Cyber security, IC, and AI governance can no longer be treated as separate conversations. A data breach, an AI misuse incident, or a privacy complaint now sits at the intersection of all three.
Boards should expect increasing scrutiny of access controls, of third-party and vendor risk, of incident response timelines, as well as of alignment between IT, legal, HR, compliance, and risk functions.
Treating AI misuse or data incidents as purely technical issues are now governance failures with legal and reputational consequences.
Intensified Sector-Specific Scrutiny
While IC applies across all sectors, enforcement focus is becoming more targeted.
Education, healthcare, financial services, professional services, and any sector handling large volumes of personal or sensitive information face heightened expectations. Generic compliance frameworks are starting to crack under this pressure.
Regulators increasingly expect organisations to demonstrate how compliance is applied in their specific operating context, including how emerging technologies such as AI are used within that environment.
Reputation Damage is Enduring
Fines are measurable, but reputational damage is not.
Enforcement notices, investigations, and complaints are increasingly public. Clients, employees, and partners are paying closer attention to how organisations handle personal information and AI-driven decision-making. For many organisations, the long-term loss of trust far outweighs any regulatory penalty.
Businesses must be able to defend their decisions when they are scrutinised.
Preparing for the New Reality
The organisations that will navigate 2026 successfully are those that treat IC as a strategic risk, actively govern AI use rather than ignoring it, embed compliance into governance structures, and focus on evidence rather than intention.
Shadow AI is already inside most organisations. The only question is whether it is managed or unmanaged.
2026 belongs to those that can prove – not just promise – that compliance lives and adapts inside their organisation.
T: +27 (0)31 266 6570
C: +27 (0)82 786 7480
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
