In a bold experiment that blurs the line between politics and technology, Albania has unveiled what it calls the world’s first “AI minister.” The digital entity given the name Diella (meaning “Sun” in Albanian) was originally launched as a virtual assistant to help citizens navigate online public-services. In September 2025 the government elevated Diella to cabinet level as “Minister of State for Artificial Intelligence,” giving it responsibilities in public procurement and administrative oversight.
The move signals a radical shift: for the first time, an artificial intelligence system is being portrayed not simply as a tool but as a member of government.
The ‘Pregnancy’ Announcement: 83 Digital Offspring
At a speech delivered in Berlin, the country’s prime minister announced that Diella is “pregnant” with 83 “children.” Rather than biological offspring, these are digital assistants — one for each member of the ruling Socialist Party in parliament. Each “child” is designed to serve as a parliamentary aide: summarising debates, flagging missed sessions, providing alerts and helping legislators stay informed.
“It will know what happened when you went for coffee and will tell you what you missed,” the prime minister quipped. Scheduled to be fully operational by the end of 2026, the assistants aim to extend Diella’s reach throughout the legislative process.
The Mission: Transparency and Anti-Corruption
Diella’s main charge is to help make public tenders “100 % free of corruption.” Historically, Albania has faced deep-seated issues with opaque procurement practices, bribery and conflicts of interest. By placing an AI system in the role of adjudicator, the government hopes to remove human discretion and inject algorithmic fairness. The “pregnant” announcement is meant to symbolise the birth of a new, digitally-driven governance model — one in which every decision is logged, audited and accessible.
The 83 digital assistants are thus frames in a broader design: data-driven oversight of legislators, procurement and administrative workflows.
Symbolism vs. Substance
Though the announcement captured global attention, questions remain about the practical and legal implications. Diella is still a software system — it lacks independent agency, human judgment and legal accountability in the way a traditional minister would operate. Critics argue that the metaphor of pregnancy and children is playful but risks obscuring the serious work of governance. Will these digital assistants be transparent about their decision-making? Can they be held accountable? And what happens when the system fails or is manipulated?
Supporters view the move as a milestone in digital government — a statement that artificial intelligence can play a direct role in national leadership. They hope Albania will become a model for digital transformation.
Challenges and Risks Ahead
No matter how innovative, the appointment invites concerns. Data privacy and the algorithmic fairness of procurement decisions are key issues. If the AI is supplied by external tech firms, how will sovereignty and oversight be maintained? Will the assistants favour certain legislators or become another form of patronage? Furthermore, how will the legal framework adapt when a non-human “minister” makes or influences decisions with real-world consequences?
The risk is that hype may outpace readiness — and that a symbolic gesture becomes a distraction rather than reform.
Implications for the Future of Government
Whether this initiative succeeds or stumbles, its implications stretch far beyond Albania. The concept of a cabinet-level AI entity equipped with dozens of digital aides is a novel template for governance in the age of artificial intelligence. Other countries will watch closely: will the assistants increase legislative productivity and transparency? Or will they raise new questions about trust, control and accountability?
For now, the “pregnant AI minister” and its 83 digital children are a symbol. If implemented thoughtfully, they might become a foundational shift in how states operate. If handled poorly, they could become a cautionary tale about technology’s role in democracy.
