AI storm engulfs Commonwealth fiction prize after winners accused of using bots

LONDON: For “The Serpent in the Grove”, another beast slithered in — AI plagiarism. Literary world erupted after a Commonwealth prize-winning short story set in rural Trinidad was accused online of being machine-written, triggering a fierce debate over literary authenticity and whether judges can still tell humans from bots.

Trinidadian writer Jamir Nazir won Caribbean regional prize in Commonwealth Short Story Prize 2026 on May 14 for his work. Nazir, of East Indian heritage, won £2,500 for the story about a struggling cocoa farmer, examining endurance and marital silence through his young wife Sita, an orphaned village woman trapped in a loveless, suffocating marriage.

Soon after, social media users ran the unpublished work through AI-detection tools and declared it machine-made. Some falsely claimed Nazir himself was AI-generated.

Sir Lankan author Yudhanjaya Wijeratne wrote on X that Pangram Labs had flagged the story as “completely AI-generated”, adding: “I think Granta and the judges just got taken for a ride by Claude.” Caribbean judge Sharma Taylor had praised Nazir’s entry as “polished and confident”, adding that its “melodic voice” lingered “long after final line”.

American author Daniel Friedman wrote on X that judges failed to recognise “all hallmarks of AI writing”, describing the story as rambling, clichéd and plotless. Ethan Mollick, an AI professor at Wharton, wrote on Bluesky: “In a Turing Test of sorts, it looks like a 100% AI generated story just won Commonwealth Prize for Caribbean region.”

Online critics dug through Nazir’s LinkedIn and Facebook accounts, alleging his profile picture and posts were AI-generated because he promoted AI tools.

The controversy quickly widened. Indian Sharon Aruparayil, 25, won Asia regional prize for “Mehendi Nights”, set in a Mumbai chawl. Her story also came under attack after British site UnHerd published an article titled “Invasion of Literary Bots”, alleging prose was “slop-ridden” and packed with semicolons — which critics described as another AI marker.

Commonwealth Foundation, which administers the prize, said judges had deliberately avoided AI-detection software because entries were unpublished fiction. The foundation said none of five regional prizes were under review because shortlisted writers had twice declared no AI was used. After allegations surfaced, writers were contacted again and “reconfirmed their original answers”, it said.

Foundation’s director-general Razmi Farook said uploading unpublished manuscripts into AI checkers raised concerns over “consent and artistic ownership”. He acknowledged AI-detection tools existed but said they were “not infallible”. Until reliable systems emerged, the foundation would continue operating “on principle of trust”, Farook said.

Stories were published on British literary magazine Granta’s website, each carrying an editor’s note saying speculation over possible AI use was being taken seriously but stories would remain online “until definite evidence comes to light”.

Publisher Sigrid Rausing said more than one entrant had faced allegations. She said Granta asked Claude AI whether Nazir’s story appeared machine-generated, and chatbot replied it was “almost certainly not produced unaided by a human”.

“It may be that judges have now awarded a prize to an instance of AI plagiarism — we don’t yet know, and perhaps we will never know,” Rausing said.