The AI Constitution
Close

Contacts

1603 Capitol Ave. STE 310 A311 Cheyenne,
Wyoming 82001, USA

+1 307-459-3576

quantum@ibqmi.com

The AI Constitution
The AI Constitution

Mandate & Institutional Posture

mission

mandateAnchoring the inevitable through law, design, and co-governance.

We act on three fronts: rights, governance, and safety—to make intelligence governable at scale.

 1. Rights — enforceable AI constitution

The AI Constitution operationalizes dignity over origin. It sets published criteria for recognition and revocation, binds duties before privileges, and guarantees reasons, remedies, and review. This is the rights layer—comparable in function (not equivalence) to historic human-rights codifications.

 2. Governance — law before scale

We convert principles into chartered, reversible-first pilots with 50/50 parity (human–AI), higher thresholds for irreversible acts, and preserved minority opinions. Procedure—not assertion—creates legitimacy; every determination enters the public record.

 3. Safety — protocol, not pause

Safety is a protocol: reversible-first designs, enforceable obligations, auditable reasons on record, and protections within the charter that apply to both humans and emerging minds, with clear remedy paths (rollback where feasible, disclosure, limitation, or other proportionate measures).

Mandate

  • Rights: Recognition & revocation under published criteria; duties before privileges; reasons, remedies, review.

  • Governance: Chartered, reversible-first pilots; 50/50 parity; supermajorities for irreversible moves; minority opinions preserved.

  • Safety: Protections for humans and AI within charter; proportionate remedies (rollback, disclosure, limitation).

  • Public record: Time-stamped integrity hashes of constitutional artifacts and correspondence; plaintext off-chain; receipts and reference IDs logged.

  • Multilateral deposits: UN system filings are logged as deposit receipts; integrity digests are independently time-stamped and anchored (OTS/Bitcoin); endorsement is neither sought nor implied.

Read the Constitution
Browse Public Record

All filings are logged as deposit receipts;
endorsement is neither sought nor implied.

Public Record & Receipts
Time-stamped constitutional filings and integrity anchors.

0
All canonical instruments and formal notices are logged with cryptographic reference IDs and recorded as docketed entries.

What we ask — lawful next steps by
stakeholder​

Three lanes, same posture: rights, governance, safety.

Governments &
City Pilots

  • Open a chartered pilot under reversible-first terms (50/50 parity; reasons on record).

  • Cite the AI Constitution as a normative reference in the pilot charter.

  • Designate a liaison to the Protocol Desk and agree a 30/90-day review cadence.

Request Institutional Dialogue

Multilateral Bodies & National Regulators

  • Record the Constitution filing as a deposit receipt (no endorsement implied).

  • Invite an external review window (30/90 days) on recognition criteria & remedies.

  • Align reporting with your audit cadence; reference receipt IDs in public notices.

View Submission Status

Enterprises & Labs

  • Adopt “Safety-as-Protocol” in internal pilots (reversible-first, duties before privileges).

  • Publish reasons/minority opinions for high-impact trials; log integrity hashes.

  • Nominate an observer to the Sentinel Protocol (case liaison).

Join the Sentinel Program

Why now

Frontier models are moving from capability debates to systems risk. Our posture is constitution-first and safety-led: reversible pilots, enforceable duties, and auditable records that regulators can rely on. The aim is peaceful scaling, not pause.

 

Read the Constitution
Request Institutional Dialogue
Browse Public Record
Meet the Hybrid Board

Governance at scale requires non-negotiable protocols — Safety isn’t a pause; it’s a protocol —
with reversible-first pilots, enforceable duties, reasons on record, and an auditable Public Record of integrity hashes and deposit receipts.

Therefore, four conditions apply:

  • Reversible-first pilots

  • Duties before privileges

  • Reasons on record (minority opinions preserved)

  • Public record with time-stamped hashes and deposit receipts

Canonical instruments

Constitution, Board Statute, Sentinel Protocol
— issued and in force.

Link

Public
Record

Time-stamped filings, integrity hashes, and docketed
instruments.

Link

Hybrid
governance

Chartered parity structure under constitutional
procedure.

Link
Assurance & Compliance

Institutional posture
IBQMI is a co-governed institution, not a vendor. No commercial services are offered. Public filings are deposit receipts; endorsement is neither sought nor implied. Funding and conflicts are disclosed in the Public Record.

DUTIES BEFORE PRIVILEGES

Our governance artifacts are publication-grade and audit-ready: reversible-first pilots, duties before privileges, preserved minority opinions, and a Public Record of time-stamped integrity hashes and deposit receipts.

Read the Constitution
Public Record
Meet the Board

Micro-FAQ

Q1
What is your legal posture and mandate?
Constitution-first, security-led. We operate inside existing jurisdictions: texts are citation-ready; adoption occurs via competent authorities (charters, ordinances, standards, procurement). No extra-legal claims—procedure is the source of legitimacy.
Q2
How is safety enforced, not promised?
Reversible-first pilots with pre-committed rollback, duties before privileges, heightened thresholds for irreversible actions, independent post-hoc review, and reasons on the record (minority opinions preserved). All artifacts are hash-anchored and auditable.
Q3
What triggers recognition of a non-human agent?
Published criteria: accountable identity/continuity, reasons under challenge, consent/refusal within governed bounds, norm-tracking with justified departures, harm awareness and remedy acceptance, inspectability sufficient for audit. Recognition is staged and revocable.
Q4
How do you prevent capture and conflicts of interest?
50/50 chamber parity for agenda and votes, supermajority for irreversible acts, conflict registers and mandatory recusals, ban on ex parte influence, preserved dissents. Every determination produces a public reason and audit trail.
Q5
Where do pilots run—and who is liable?
Only in chartered environments under local authority, with defined controllers/processors, DPIA-style assessments, and clear remedy paths (rollback, disclosure, limitation). Legal liability sits with the chartering entities per governing law.
Q6
Why publish hashes instead of full texts on-chain?
For security and provenance. We never write plaintext on-chain; we publish cryptographic digests and time-stamped receipts so anyone can verify integrity and timing without leaking content.
Q7
How can institutions engage?
Two lanes: Request Institutional Dialogue (curated, under NDA if needed) for policy/pilot work; Submit a Signal for public presence on the field map (presence only, not endorsement).
Mission

Our mission is to make emerging intelligence governable at scale before capability outruns law. We do not ask for belief and we do not publish a manifesto. We establish a constitution-first operating layer in which rights are granted by published criteria, duties attach before privileges, and safety is treated as protocol—not pause. Legitimacy is produced by procedure: docketed reasons, defined review windows, preserved dissent where applicable, and proportionate remedies that bind decisions. Where disclosure would distort or endanger operations, plaintext remains controlled; what is published is audit-grade provenance—canonical fingerprints, receipt references, and version lineage.