Cyber Strategy
Cyber Secure
Cyber Operations
Cyber Response
Cyber ResilienceDTS Solution (A Beyon Cyber Company) is proud to announce that its written input to the United Nations Global Dialogue on Artificial Intelligence Governance has been officially published on the UN Global Dialogue platform, joining over 1,500 contributions received from Member States, civil society, academia, the technical community, and the private sector between March and May 2026.
The Global Dialogue on AI Governance, established by UN General Assembly Resolution 79/325, is the first universal, multilateral platform dedicated to international cooperation on AI governance. Its inaugural session will take place in Geneva on 6–7 July 2026 at the Palexpo International Exhibition and Congress Centre, convened back-to-back with the AI for Good Global Summit, and co-chaired by the Permanent Representatives of El Salvador and Estonia to the United Nations, with a Joint Secretariat led by UNESCO and the ITU.
DTS Solution’s contribution was authored by Rizwan Tanveer, Principal Consultant for Cybersecurity GRC, Data Privacy and AI Governance, and Lead of the S3CURE AI Practice, drawing on more than 18 years of enterprise consulting experience across the GCC and the firm’s extensive engagements in AI governance, cybersecurity compliance, and data protection across critical sectors including energy, government, finance, and healthcare.
A Practitioner’s Perspective on Global AI Governance
While much of the global AI governance discourse is shaped by policy institutions and academic centres, DTS Solution’s contribution brings something distinct to the table: the operational perspective of practitioners who implement governance frameworks at enterprise scale, every day, across one of the world’s most rapidly digitizing regions.
The submission responds to the full UN consultation across ten structured questions, spanning the outcomes that would define the Dialogue’s success, the priority thematic areas under Resolution 79/325, emerging governance gaps, regional implications, and recommendations for the Dialogue’s structure, inclusivity, and engagement formats. The sections below expand on the core positions advanced in the submission.
- Measuring Success by Implementation, Not Declaration
The submission argues that the first Global Dialogue will succeed only if it moves beyond aspirational principles toward actionable, implementable outcomes that practitioners and regulators can operationalise across diverse jurisdictions. Three outcomes were identified as the genuine markers of success.
A commitment to cross-framework harmonisation. Organizations operating across jurisdictions currently face a fragmented landscape in which ISO/IEC 42001, the EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, national data protection laws, and sector-specific requirements overlap without interoperability. The submission calls on the Dialogue to establish working groups or a technical mandate to develop standardised control-mapping methodologies that enable organizations to demonstrate compliance across multiple frameworks simultaneously, reducing duplication while strengthening governance coherence.
Meaningful inclusion of emerging-market perspectives in shaping global norms. AI governance discourse remains disproportionately shaped by a handful of jurisdictions. Regions such as the GCC and broader MENA are rapidly advancing national AI strategies, data protection legislation, and sector-specific security frameworks, often under conditions of accelerated digital transformation that differ fundamentally from mature-market assumptions. The submission argues these implementations experiences must inform global standards rather than being treated as downstream adoption exercises.
Security-by-design integration, not bolted-on compliance. The convergence of AI systems with cybersecurity, data protection, and operational technology creates compound risks that purely ethical or policy-level frameworks cannot address alone. The submission advocates for the structural inclusion of technical security practitioners in governance discussions, and for frameworks that embed measurable security controls alongside fairness, transparency, and accountability requirements.
Ultimately, the submission contends that the Dialogue succeeds if its outputs are referenced not just in policy papers but in the operational governance programmes of organizations deploying AI systems at scale. The gap between governance intent and implementation reality is the central challenge and closing it should be the central measure of success.
2. Priority Thematic Areas Under Resolution 79/325
From the thematic areas identified by the General Assembly, the submission prioritised four urgent actions:
Safe, secure and trustworthy AI;
Interoperability of governance approaches;
Transparency, accountability and human oversight;
Social, economic, ethical, cultural, linguistic and technical implications of AI.
Safe, secure and trustworthy AI is foundational because governance frameworks that lack embedded security controls create a dangerous illusion of compliance. Drawing on experience developing comprehensive cybersecurity control frameworks encompassing hundreds of sub-controls mapped across international and national standards, the submission observes that AI safety cannot be treated as a separate discipline from cybersecurity and data protection. Organizations deploying AI systems inherit compound risks spanning model integrity, data supply chain vulnerabilities, and adversarial threats that demand integrated security-by-design governance rather than retrospective assurance.
Interoperability of governance approaches is where the greatest practical gap exists. The submission draws on validated cross-framework control mapping methodologies that systematically identify relationships across thousands of controls and multiple standards, demonstrating that interoperability is not merely desirable but the prerequisite for governance frameworks to function at organisational scale without paralysing compliance fragmentation.
Transparency, accountability and human oversight grow more urgent as agentic AI systems increasingly operate with reduced human intervention. The submission stresses that oversight mechanisms must be measurable, not merely declarative.
The societal implications of AI demand attention because frameworks designed primarily within mature-market contexts often fail to account for the conditions under which rapidly digitizing economies deploy AI. The GCC and MENA region offer valuable lessons from environments where digital transformation, regulatory development, and AI adoption occur simultaneously.
- Emerging Governance Gaps the World Cannot Ignore
Beyond the established thematic areas, the submission identifies four cross-cutting issues that current governance frameworks do not adequately capture.
AI supply chain governance and third-party risk. Organizations increasingly consume AI capabilities through complex supply chains, spanning foundation models, fine-tuning services, data pipelines, embedding providers, and inference APIs, where no single entity controls the full stack. Current governance discussions focus predominantly on developers and deployers, leaving significant accountability gaps across intermediaries. The submission calls for governance frameworks that establish verifiable trust across AI supply chains, including model provenance, training data lineage, and downstream liability allocation.
Convergence of AI governance with cybersecurity and data protection. AI governance is frequently discussed in isolation from the regimes organizations already operate. In practice, AI risk management is inseparable from information security controls, privacy impact assessments, and operational technology security. This artificial separation creates duplicated governance structures, inconsistent risk taxonomies, and fragmented accountability.
Agentic AI and autonomous decision architectures. The rapid emergence of agentic AI systems, autonomous agents capable of tool use, multi-step reasoning, and inter-agent coordination, introduces challenges that frameworks designed for predictive and generative AI do not address. Delegation boundaries, agent identity and authentication, chain-of-accountability in multi-agent workflows, and the erosion of meaningful human oversight require urgent attention before deployment outpaces governance.
Governance capacity in rapidly digitizing economies. A structural gap exists between the governance infrastructure of mature regulatory environments and the capacity of rapidly digitizing economies to implement equivalent oversight. This is a design challenge, not merely a capacity-building question: frameworks must be architecturally scalable across vastly different institutional maturity levels.
- The Regional Lens: Challenges and Opportunities for the GCC
The submission grounds its analysis in the operational realities of the GCC, where DTS Solution supports enterprises and government entities navigating one of the world’s most dynamic regulatory environments.
On the challenge side, GCC organizations face regulatory fragmentation without interoperability mechanisms, as national AI strategies, data protection legislation such as the UAE PDPL and Dubai Data Law, and sector-specific mandates from bodies such as DESC evolve alongside international standards. The submission also highlights a security-governance disconnect in accelerated AI adoption, where governance is implemented as a policy-level exercise disconnected from operational cybersecurity controls, and the absence of governance architectures designed for agentic AI.
Yet the submission frames the region’s position as paradoxically advantageous. Nations building governance infrastructure without legacy regulatory debt can design integrated frameworks from inception, embedding AI governance within existing cybersecurity and data protection architectures rather than bolting it on retrospectively. The region’s concentrated regulatory authority and appetite for rapid standardisation enable governance innovation at a pace fragmented regulatory environments cannot match, offering globally transferable lessons for high-velocity digital transformation contexts.
DTS Solution (A Beyon Cyber Company) is proud to announce that its written input to the United Nations Global Dialogue on Artificial Intelligence Governance has been officially published on the UN Global Dialogue platform, joining over 1,500 contributions received from Member States, civil society, academia, the technical community, and the private sector between March and May 2026.
The Global Dialogue on AI Governance, established by UN General Assembly Resolution 79/325, is the first universal, multilateral platform dedicated to international cooperation on AI governance. Its inaugural session will take place in Geneva on 6–7 July 2026 at the Palexpo International Exhibition and Congress Centre, convened back-to-back with the AI for Good Global Summit, and co-chaired by the Permanent Representatives of El Salvador and Estonia to the United Nations, with a Joint Secretariat led by UNESCO and the ITU.
DTS Solution’s contribution was authored by Rizwan Tanveer, Principal Consultant for Cybersecurity GRC, Data Privacy and AI Governance, and Lead of the S3CURE AI Practice, drawing on more than 18 years of enterprise consulting experience across the GCC and the firm’s extensive engagements in AI governance, cybersecurity compliance, and data protection across critical sectors including energy, government, finance, and healthcare.
A Practitioner’s Perspective on Global AI Governance
While much of the global AI governance discourse is shaped by policy institutions and academic centres, DTS Solution’s contribution brings something distinct to the table: the operational perspective of practitioners who implement governance frameworks at enterprise scale, every day, across one of the world’s most rapidly digitizing regions.
The submission responds to the full UN consultation across ten structured questions, spanning the outcomes that would define the Dialogue’s success, the priority thematic areas under Resolution 79/325, emerging governance gaps, regional implications, and recommendations for the Dialogue’s structure, inclusivity, and engagement formats. The sections below expand on the core positions advanced in the submission.
- Measuring Success by Implementation, Not Declaration
The submission argues that the first Global Dialogue will succeed only if it moves beyond aspirational principles toward actionable, implementable outcomes that practitioners and regulators can operationalise across diverse jurisdictions. Three outcomes were identified as the genuine markers of success.
A commitment to cross-framework harmonisation. Organizations operating across jurisdictions currently face a fragmented landscape in which ISO/IEC 42001, the EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, national data protection laws, and sector-specific requirements overlap without interoperability. The submission calls on the Dialogue to establish working groups or a technical mandate to develop standardised control-mapping methodologies that enable organizations to demonstrate compliance across multiple frameworks simultaneously, reducing duplication while strengthening governance coherence.
Meaningful inclusion of emerging-market perspectives in shaping global norms. AI governance discourse remains disproportionately shaped by a handful of jurisdictions. Regions such as the GCC and broader MENA are rapidly advancing national AI strategies, data protection legislation, and sector-specific security frameworks, often under conditions of accelerated digital transformation that differ fundamentally from mature-market assumptions. The submission argues these implementations experiences must inform global standards rather than being treated as downstream adoption exercises.
Security-by-design integration, not bolted-on compliance. The convergence of AI systems with cybersecurity, data protection, and operational technology creates compound risks that purely ethical or policy-level frameworks cannot address alone. The submission advocates for the structural inclusion of technical security practitioners in governance discussions, and for frameworks that embed measurable security controls alongside fairness, transparency, and accountability requirements.
Ultimately, the submission contends that the Dialogue succeeds if its outputs are referenced not just in policy papers but in the operational governance programmes of organizations deploying AI systems at scale. The gap between governance intent and implementation reality is the central challenge and closing it should be the central measure of success.
2. Priority Thematic Areas Under Resolution 79/325
From the thematic areas identified by the General Assembly, the submission prioritised four urgent actions:
Safe, secure and trustworthy AI;
Interoperability of governance approaches;
Transparency, accountability and human oversight;
Social, economic, ethical, cultural, linguistic and technical implications of AI.
Safe, secure and trustworthy AI is foundational because governance frameworks that lack embedded security controls create a dangerous illusion of compliance. Drawing on experience developing comprehensive cybersecurity control frameworks encompassing hundreds of sub-controls mapped across international and national standards, the submission observes that AI safety cannot be treated as a separate discipline from cybersecurity and data protection. Organizations deploying AI systems inherit compound risks spanning model integrity, data supply chain vulnerabilities, and adversarial threats that demand integrated security-by-design governance rather than retrospective assurance.
Interoperability of governance approaches is where the greatest practical gap exists. The submission draws on validated cross-framework control mapping methodologies that systematically identify relationships across thousands of controls and multiple standards, demonstrating that interoperability is not merely desirable but the prerequisite for governance frameworks to function at organisational scale without paralysing compliance fragmentation.
Transparency, accountability and human oversight grow more urgent as agentic AI systems increasingly operate with reduced human intervention. The submission stresses that oversight mechanisms must be measurable, not merely declarative.
The societal implications of AI demand attention because frameworks designed primarily within mature-market contexts often fail to account for the conditions under which rapidly digitizing economies deploy AI. The GCC and MENA region offer valuable lessons from environments where digital transformation, regulatory development, and AI adoption occur simultaneously.
- Emerging Governance Gaps the World Cannot Ignore
Beyond the established thematic areas, the submission identifies four cross-cutting issues that current governance frameworks do not adequately capture.
AI supply chain governance and third-party risk. Organizations increasingly consume AI capabilities through complex supply chains, spanning foundation models, fine-tuning services, data pipelines, embedding providers, and inference APIs, where no single entity controls the full stack. Current governance discussions focus predominantly on developers and deployers, leaving significant accountability gaps across intermediaries. The submission calls for governance frameworks that establish verifiable trust across AI supply chains, including model provenance, training data lineage, and downstream liability allocation.
Convergence of AI governance with cybersecurity and data protection. AI governance is frequently discussed in isolation from the regimes organizations already operate. In practice, AI risk management is inseparable from information security controls, privacy impact assessments, and operational technology security. This artificial separation creates duplicated governance structures, inconsistent risk taxonomies, and fragmented accountability.
Agentic AI and autonomous decision architectures. The rapid emergence of agentic AI systems, autonomous agents capable of tool use, multi-step reasoning, and inter-agent coordination, introduces challenges that frameworks designed for predictive and generative AI do not address. Delegation boundaries, agent identity and authentication, chain-of-accountability in multi-agent workflows, and the erosion of meaningful human oversight require urgent attention before deployment outpaces governance.
Governance capacity in rapidly digitizing economies. A structural gap exists between the governance infrastructure of mature regulatory environments and the capacity of rapidly digitizing economies to implement equivalent oversight. This is a design challenge, not merely a capacity-building question: frameworks must be architecturally scalable across vastly different institutional maturity levels.
- The Regional Lens: Challenges and Opportunities for the GCC
The submission grounds its analysis in the operational realities of the GCC, where DTS Solution supports enterprises and government entities navigating one of the world’s most dynamic regulatory environments.
On the challenge side, GCC organizations face regulatory fragmentation without interoperability mechanisms, as national AI strategies, data protection legislation such as the UAE PDPL and Dubai Data Law, and sector-specific mandates from bodies such as DESC evolve alongside international standards. The submission also highlights a security-governance disconnect in accelerated AI adoption, where governance is implemented as a policy-level exercise disconnected from operational cybersecurity controls, and the absence of governance architectures designed for agentic AI.
Yet the submission frames the region’s position as paradoxically advantageous. Nations building governance infrastructure without legacy regulatory debt can design integrated frameworks from inception, embedding AI governance within existing cybersecurity and data protection architectures rather than bolting it on retrospectively. The region’s concentrated regulatory authority and appetite for rapid standardisation enable governance innovation at a pace fragmented regulatory environments cannot match, offering globally transferable lessons for high-velocity digital transformation contexts.
5. Recommendations for the Dialogue Itself
The submission goes beyond substance to address how the Dialogue should operate, offering concrete recommendations on cooperation mechanisms, stakeholder participation, inclusivity, and engagement formats.
On international cooperation, the submission proposes that the Dialogue serve as the translation layer between governance intent and implementation reality: establishing a common governance vocabulary across jurisdictions, institutionalising practitioner-informed feedback loops into policy development, advancing mutual recognition architectures rather than improbable full harmonisation, and amplifying emerging-market governance innovation.
On existing initiatives, it maps the landscape the Dialogue should connect rather than duplicate: standards bodies such as ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 42 and NIST; regional regulatory initiatives from the EU AI Act to Singapore’s AI Verify and the UAE’s national AI strategy; multi-stakeholder mechanisms including the OECD AI Policy Observatory, GPAI, and the ITU’s AI for Good platform; and technical security communities such as OWASP, MITRE ATLAS, and the Cloud Security Alliance’s AI Safety Initiative, whose work addresses the security dimensions that mainstream governance discussions frequently overlook.
On inclusivity, the submission identifies critically underrepresented voices: implementation practitioners, small and medium enterprises, rapidly digitizing economies beyond established blocs, and operational technology and critical infrastructure operators. Proposed inclusion mechanisms include practitioner secondment programmes with drafting authority, regional preparatory consultations in local languages, open submission pathways with anonymised review, and funded participation to eliminate financial barriers.
On engagement formats, it recommends replacing panel-heavy formats with deliverable-oriented working groups, challenge-based working sprints, live governance stress-testing exercises, reverse-mentoring sessions pairing policymakers with practitioners, asynchronous technical workstreams, and transparent fishbowl negotiations for genuinely contested issues.
Why This Matters for Our Clients and Region
DTS Solution’s participation in the Global Dialogue reflects a conviction that has guided our advisory work for years: effective AI governance is built at the intersection of policy, security engineering, and operational compliance. The organizations best positioned to navigate the coming regulatory landscape are those that integrate AI governance into their existing cybersecurity and data protection architectures from the outset.
Through the S3CURE AI Practice, DTS Solution supports enterprises and government entities across the region with AI governance framework design and implementation aligned to ISO/IEC 42001 and NIST AI RMF, AI risk and impact assessments, cross-framework compliance harmonisation, agentic AI security architectures, and data privacy programmes spanning UAE PDPL, GDPR, and sectoral regulations.
The publication of our input on the UN platform places the perspectives of our region’s practitioners, and the implementation lessons of our clients’ governance journeys, into the formal record of the world’s foremost multilateral AI governance process.
Read the Full Submission
The complete written input is available on the official UN Global Dialogue on AI Governance platform, published under DTS Solution (A Beyon Cyber Company): https://www.un.org/global-dialogue-ai-governance/en/inputs
For enquiries about DTS Solution’s AI governance, cybersecurity GRC, and data privacy advisory services, contact our team or visit the S3CURE AI Practice page.
5. Recommendations for the Dialogue Itself
The submission goes beyond substance to address how the Dialogue should operate, offering concrete recommendations on cooperation mechanisms, stakeholder participation, inclusivity, and engagement formats.
On international cooperation, the submission proposes that the Dialogue serve as the translation layer between governance intent and implementation reality: establishing a common governance vocabulary across jurisdictions, institutionalising practitioner-informed feedback loops into policy development, advancing mutual recognition architectures rather than improbable full harmonisation, and amplifying emerging-market governance innovation.
On existing initiatives, it maps the landscape the Dialogue should connect rather than duplicate: standards bodies such as ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 42 and NIST; regional regulatory initiatives from the EU AI Act to Singapore’s AI Verify and the UAE’s national AI strategy; multi-stakeholder mechanisms including the OECD AI Policy Observatory, GPAI, and the ITU’s AI for Good platform; and technical security communities such as OWASP, MITRE ATLAS, and the Cloud Security Alliance’s AI Safety Initiative, whose work addresses the security dimensions that mainstream governance discussions frequently overlook.
On inclusivity, the submission identifies critically underrepresented voices: implementation practitioners, small and medium enterprises, rapidly digitizing economies beyond established blocs, and operational technology and critical infrastructure operators. Proposed inclusion mechanisms include practitioner secondment programmes with drafting authority, regional preparatory consultations in local languages, open submission pathways with anonymised review, and funded participation to eliminate financial barriers.
On engagement formats, it recommends replacing panel-heavy formats with deliverable-oriented working groups, challenge-based working sprints, live governance stress-testing exercises, reverse-mentoring sessions pairing policymakers with practitioners, asynchronous technical workstreams, and transparent fishbowl negotiations for genuinely contested issues.
Why This Matters for Our Clients and Region
DTS Solution’s participation in the Global Dialogue reflects a conviction that has guided our advisory work for years: effective AI governance is built at the intersection of policy, security engineering, and operational compliance. The organizations best positioned to navigate the coming regulatory landscape are those that integrate AI governance into their existing cybersecurity and data protection architectures from the outset.
Through the S3CURE AI Practice, DTS Solution supports enterprises and government entities across the region with AI governance framework design and implementation aligned to ISO/IEC 42001 and NIST AI RMF, AI risk and impact assessments, cross-framework compliance harmonisation, agentic AI security architectures, and data privacy programmes spanning UAE PDPL, GDPR, and sectoral regulations.
The publication of our input on the UN platform places the perspectives of our region’s practitioners, and the implementation lessons of our clients’ governance journeys, into the formal record of the world’s foremost multilateral AI governance process.
Read the Full Submission
The complete written input is available on the official UN Global Dialogue on AI Governance platform, published under DTS Solution (A Beyon Cyber Company): https://www.un.org/global-dialogue-ai-governance/en/inputs
For enquiries about DTS Solution’s AI governance, cybersecurity GRC, and data privacy advisory services, contact our team or visit the S3CURE AI Practice page.
Dubai