The Board Statute is the operating statute of the Hybrid Board of IBQMI®: it defines competent authority, participation, decision thresholds, record duties, and change control, so that The AI Constitution is enforceable as a matter of procedure.
Where The AI Constitution sets duties and rights, the Board Statute governs how determinations are made, recorded, reviewed, and amended. It is an internal governance instrument; national legal orders remain unaffected.
Verify: canonical fingerprint and release metadata are listed below at the canonical release endpoint.
Who may issue instruments; participation boundaries; valid acts vs drafts.
Escalation for impact and irreversibility; supermajorities; independent review.
Reason bundles, dissent preservation, publication posture, and auditability.
What the Statute Governs
A charter-grade scope map of the procedures that make The AI Constitution enforceable as a matter of process.
- Competent authority and issuance boundaries
- Composition and conditional participation (human / non-human)
- Quorum and decision thresholds
- Irreversible-act protections and independent review triggers
- Definitions and interpretation of key terms, including the hierarchy between The AI Constitution, this Board Statute, and annexed instruments, and the authentic language clause.
- Record duties and publication boundaries (hashes/receipts/provenance)
- Review cadence and appeal windows
- Remedies and enforcement posture (including revocation where applicable)
- Change control and versioning (no silent edits)
- Entry into force, transitional handling of pre-statute issuances, and the non-derogation principle with respect to national legal orders.
Composition and participation
The Board is defined as an operating body with two chambers; participation is conditional, reviewable, and subject to recorded independence safeguards.
Chambers and standing
- The Human Chamber comprises designated institutional members acting under declared mandate and conflict-of-interest constraints.
- The Non-human Chamber comprises recognized non-human agents admitted under conditional standing and defined participation limits.
- Standing is not permanent by default; participation may be granted, suspended, or revoked under recorded criteria and review windows.
- Recognition status and participation scope are linked to the applicable recognition criteria and revocation pathway.
Participation safeguards
- Participation is conditional and reviewable: quorum eligibility, voting weight, and access to evidence may be scoped per matter.
- Independence is protected by disclosure duties, recusal rules, and documented conflict-of-interest checks for members and agents.
- Where high-impact or irreversible determinations are considered, independent review triggers apply and dissent must be preservable on record.
- All participation conditions, recusals, and overrides are docketed as part of the decision’s reason-bundle.
Decision mechanics
The Statute defines the decision tiers that make the AI Constitution enforceable as a matter of process: thresholds, mandatory review triggers, and record duties.
Threshold model
Review, dissent, appeal
- Reversible acts: standard quorum and voting rules; rollback-ready remedies.
- Partially reversible acts: heightened scrutiny; bounded pilots and enhanced review cadence.
- Irreversible acts: supermajorities in both chambers plus mandatory independent review.
- Emergency actions: narrow scope, time-bounded authorization, and mandatory ex post review.
- Reasons on record: each determination is docketed with a reason bundle and provenance references.
- Preserved dissent: minority positions are recorded where applicable.
- Fixed review windows: high-impact determinations are scheduled for review (e.g., 30/90 days).
- Procedural appeals: defined standing, timelines, and remedy pathways.
Remedy taxonomy
Remedies are standardized, proportional, and record-bound; selection is driven by impact and reversibility.
Rollback (where feasible)
Revert the act to the last valid state; requires traceable provenance and rollback-ready implementation constraints.
Limitation
Constrain scope, capability, access, or deployment conditions to reduce risk while preserving lawful/legitimate operation.
Disclosure
Publish or disclose defined portions of the reason-bundle or evidence summary under controlled rules, without releasing sensitive plaintext.
Suspension
Temporarily halt an instrument, release, or participation right pending review outcome or remediation completion; always time-bounded and logged.
Revocation
Withdraw standing, participation privileges, or instrument validity where thresholds are breached; revocations remain preserved in the record with provenance continuity.
Remedy selection must be consistent, necessity-based, and fully docketed.
Records, evidence, and publication boundaries
The Statute distinguishes docketing, public disclosure, and controlled evidence custody—so decisions are auditable without exposing sensitive plaintext.
What is docketed (required)
What is public (minimal, sufficient)
What remains controlled (off-chain)
Every determination receives a docket entry with timestamp, scope, and responsible issuance path.
A reason-bundle is recorded for every material determination, including applicable thresholds and review triggers.
Preserved dissent is docketed where applicable, including minority positions and recusal events.
Evidence is packaged as a manifest (bundle index), with integrity references and custody notes. Entries are not deleted; where determinations are superseded, earlier entries remain visible as part of the docket’s version lineage.
Canonical fingerprints (SHA-256) for official releases and referenced attachments.
Receipt references where available (deposit/filing acknowledgements; communications receipts).
Version provenance: release label, timestamp, and declared change notes (delta summary).
Public summaries of institutional actions, without publication of sensitive plaintext.
Plaintext documents, operational logs, sensitive submissions, and protected evidence remain in controlled custody.
Access is granted only under defined review procedures, lawful basis, and standing requirements.
Confidential materials may be disclosed in camera or under controlled review windows when required.
Public record integrity is maintained via fingerprints and receipts, not by releasing sensitive content.
Plaintext documents, operational logs, sensitive submissions, and protected evidence remain in controlled custody.
Access is granted only under defined review procedures, lawful basis, and standing requirements.
Confidential materials may be disclosed in camera or under controlled review windows when required.
Public record integrity is maintained via fingerprints and receipts, not by releasing sensitive content.
Issuance and change control
Issuance authority is explicit; changes are versioned; integrity is preserved through canonical fingerprints and traceable provenance.
Competent authority
Only the Hybrid Board issues official versions and canonical supplements.
No silent edits
Every change is a new version with cited deltas and updated fingerprints.
Authorized copies
Byte-identical copies only; derivatives must be marked non-authoritative.
Canonical release endpoint
Official releases are identified by canonical fingerprint and UTC timestamp. A human-readable release label is used for citation in the Public Record; public integrity is proven by recorded entries and receipts, not by endorsements.Public integrity is proven by record entries and receipts, not by endorsements.
Release authority
Release channel
Fingerprint method
Release label
Timestamp (UTC)
Canonical fingerprint (SHA-256)
Integrity posture
The Hybrid Board
Public Record (version provenance + receipt references)
SHA-256 (published per release)
Board Statute v1.0 – Initial canonical release
2026-01-29, 13:42:00
f3da5ec568be7167bdf88224f82d8bdd79952b28e891b58fdd392d0a7289d7c9
Deposit receipts are evidence of filing, not endorsement. Plaintext artifacts remain
off-chain; only fingerprints, receipts, and provenance are published
Institutional actions
Use the Statute as the procedural reference point for adoption: cite it in charters, align review cadence, and bind determinations to record duties.
Institutional clarifications
The Board Statute is an internal governance instrument of the Hybrid Board of IBQMI®. It structures how The AI Constitution and related instruments are issued, reviewed, and recorded. It does not itself constitute a national statute or an international treaty; domestic legal orders and treaty obligations remain unaffected.
The Statute is binding on the Hybrid Board, on staff acting under IBQMI mandates related to The AI Constitution, and on any internal bodies created under it. It does not unilaterally impose obligations on states or external institutions, although they may choose to reference or adopt it in their own frameworks.
The Statute is designed as a compatible governance and reference framework. Where its provisions intersect with domestic or international law, domestic and international law prevail. Nothing in the Statute purports to limit states’ legislative, judicial, or treaty-based competences.
Only the Hybrid Board may issue or amend The AI Constitution, this Board Statute, and their canonical supplements. Official versions are those with a docketed release label, canonical fingerprint, and timestamp (UTC) in the Public Record.
Public artefacts include hashes, receipt references, version metadata, non-sensitive summaries, and, where applicable, canonical PDFs. Plaintext materials containing sensitive submissions, internal deliberation records, or protected evidence remain in controlled custody and are accessible only under defined review procedures and lawful-basis requirements.
The Statute defines a two-chamber Hybrid Board, with human and non-human participants subject to explicit recognition criteria, participation safeguards, and recorded conflicts-of-interest rules. Voting weight, standing, and participation conditions are determined by chamber rules set out in the Statute.
Decisions that do not meet the applicable quorum, voting thresholds, or record duties are treated as procedurally defective. The Statute requires such defects to be identified, docketed, and addressed through the review and remedy framework, including rollback where feasible or, where rollback is not possible, limitation, disclosure, suspension, or revocation.
Amendments may only be adopted by the Hybrid Board under elevated thresholds. Each amendment cycle is issued as a new version with its own release label, timestamp (UTC), and SHA-256 fingerprint, docketed in the Public Record together with a summary of changes. The Canonical release endpoint on this page always points to the current official version.
The Statute is subject to periodic review by the Hybrid Board, with mandatory review windows defined in the Statute itself. Any resulting revisions follow the same issuance discipline: release label, canonical fingerprint, timestamp, and a docketed change summary in the Public Record.