The Iranian Diaspora Cooperation & Development Council (IDCDC)
Iranians across the world—those long established in diaspora, those born abroad across second, third, fourth and subsequent generations, and those newly arrived or in transit—constitute a globally distributed community of exceptional capability, cultural depth, and civic responsibility. Across North America, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia, Iranian communities contribute materially to medicine and engineering, finance and research, entrepreneurship and the arts, public service and civil society. This diaspora capacity has repeatedly proven decisive in moments of crisis, renewal, and civic contribution, yet it remains structurally under-coordinated and intermittently vulnerable due to fragmentation, distrust, generational discontinuity, unequal access to credible institutions, uneven civic infrastructure, and sustained exposure to intimidation, infiltration, misrepresentation, and manipulation.
The diaspora’s enduring challenge is not the absence of competence or commitment; it is the absence of durable, trusted, safety-aware institutional architecture capable of converting distributed strength into lawful cooperation, measurable public benefit, and intergenerational continuity. Too often, diaspora initiatives depend on short-lived convenings, charismatic personalities, volatile news cycles, or narrow organizational silos; too often, competing narratives, resource duplication, reputational attacks, and fear of exposure degrade cooperation. Minority communities and vulnerable persons—women, youth, newly arrived migrants, refugees, dissidents, and marginalized groups—bear disproportional cost when participation is unsafe or when institutional safeguards are weak. In such conditions, even high-integrity work becomes harder to sustain, harder to scale, and easier to distort.
From 2015 to 2025, the Diwān Network undertook a decade of structured research, convening, prototyping, and design to address this coordination gap by reviving the Diwān tradition: an institutional pattern of civic deliberation, record discipline, and cultural continuity, adapted to modern cross-border realities, contemporary safety requirements, and the practical constraints of dispersed communities. Diwān’s work demonstrated a governing insight: unity does not require uniformity. Plural belonging can be held together by shared method, shared minimum standards, disciplined recordkeeping, and applied collaboration across professions, communities, and generations—provided that participation is protected, integrity is enforced, and correction is treated as institutional strength rather than reputational failure.
This Charter completes that arc by constituting, as of 2026, the Iranian Diaspora Cooperation & Development Council (IDCDC) as Diwān’s institutional successor and continuity body. IDCDC is established as a permanent, non-state, public-interest technical cooperation and development-readiness council—authoritative by method and protected by governance. Its institutional legitimacy shall be earned through transparent standards; credible and reproducible indicators; peer review with follow-up tracking; disciplined publication, revision, correction, and supersession; independent integrity oversight; protected participation; handling and safety controls; and enforceable safeguards against capture, coercion, laundering, and misrepresentation. IDCDC is constituted to endure beyond personalities and news cycles through intergenerational architecture: mentorship pathways, leadership renewal, multilingual knowledge commons, and durable records that preserve institutional memory and enable accountable continuity.
IDCDC is founded on strict independence and strict non-partisanship. It shall remain independent of any government, political party or faction, corporate control group, donor bloc, religious institution, or ideological school. It shall not campaign, endorse, mobilize electorally, provide platform advantage, or operate as a political body. It shall not function as a government-in-exile, a representative authority, a regulator, or a supervisory body. IDCDC’s authority is institutional and methodological, not sovereign, coercive, or propagandistic. It shall be structured so that no external actor can reasonably be understood to control its agenda, methods, staffing, publications, credentialing, procurement, or allocations; and it shall maintain enforceable boundaries against reputational laundering, donor steering, factional capture, and intimidation-by-proxy.
IDCDC is also founded on a strict non-execution perimeter. It does not underwrite, custody, pool, route, hold, or disburse funds for third parties; does not hold client monies; does not solicit, promote, place, or intermediate regulated financial activity; and does not operate payments, securities, commodities, insurance, or other regulated markets. IDCDC exists to reduce fragmentation, lower risk, and increase implementability by building the standards, evidence posture, and readiness discipline that enable competent authorities, institutions, and lawful partners to act responsibly within their own legal perimeters. IDCDC strengthens execution readiness without becoming execution. Where lawful actors elect to act, they do so through their own regulated perimeters and accountability structures, informed—where relevant—by IDCDC’s methods-led, corrigible, safety-aware work.
IDCDC serves Iranians where lawful action is possible now—across host countries and the global diaspora—through a federated structure of Chapters (host-country community cells) and Colleges (communities of practice). Chapters enable lawful local cooperation, community services, resilience programs, civic capacity, and institutional partnerships. Colleges convert diaspora expertise into reusable institutional capability: standards, toolkits, peer review capacity, measurement methods, curricula, translations, and implementation guides. Across both, IDCDC shall maintain protected participation: confidentiality tiers, role-based attribution where needed, anti-doxxing enforcement, secure reporting channels, data minimization, and safety-screened convening—so contributors can engage without exposure to intimidation, infiltration, or retaliation.
IDCDC further maintains a disciplined, non-political “Iran Readiness Window”: a preparedness capability for the future without asserting authority, without claiming representation, and without executing. If lawful openings emerge, readiness—not improvisation—shall guide responsible engagement through separate, legally compliant, independently governed vehicles as required. Until such openings exist, IDCDC’s work remains diaspora-serving, host-country lawful, and method-led: building public-interest digital commons, strengthening diaspora wellbeing and mobility, advancing civic competence, improving accountability and safeguards, and sustaining cultural vitality across generations.
IDCDC is constituted on the principle that trust is an institutional asset earned through verifiable work and safeguarded through enforceable governance. It therefore adopts, as constitutional posture, transparency without exposure: methods and outcomes are published to the maximum extent compatible with safety; where risk exists, redacted summaries are published while internal audit trails are preserved; and correction and supersession are mandatory disciplines, not reputational admissions. IDCDC affirms inclusion without erasure: structural inclusion across Iran’s full mosaic of languages, regions, ethnicities, faiths and none, genders, and generations, with unity pursued by shared method and shared dignity rather than forced uniformity.
In establishing IDCDC, the founding intent is to create a durable cooperation infrastructure for the Iranian diaspora: a civic Diwān for the twenty-first century—records-first, methods-first, safety-aware, corruption-resistant, and intergenerational by design—so that the distributed strengths of a global community can be converted into measurable public benefit, protected participation, and practical readiness, guided by an enduring ethic made operational through governance: Good Thoughts, Good Words, Good Deeds.
PART I — ESTABLISHMENT
1.1 Establishment
1.1.1 Constitution. The Iranian Diaspora Cooperation & Development Council (IDCDC) is hereby constituted as a permanent, non-state, public-interest technical cooperation and development-readiness council (the “Council”).
1.1.2 Legal posture. The Council shall be organized and maintained through such lawful entities, registrations, or arrangements as the Governing Board may determine, consistent with host-country law, this Charter, and the Council’s strict independence and non-execution perimeter.
1.1.3 Continuity mandate. The Council is constituted to endure: intergenerational by design, plural by composition, disciplined by records, and independent by enforceable safeguards.
1.1.4 Governing instrument. This Charter is the Council’s governing constitution for all organs, Chapters, Colleges, Members, officers, contractors, volunteers, and recognized partners acting under the Council’s name or marks.
1.2 Institutional succession
1.2.1 Designation. The Council is the designated institutional successor and continuity body to the Diwān Network (2015–2025) and shall preserve, curate, and maintain Diwān’s accumulated methods, work products, operating practices, and institutional memory, subject to the integrity, handling, and safety controls of this Charter.
1.2.2 Continuity with upgrade. Succession includes continuity of purpose and method while upgrading governance, quality assurance, security posture, independence enforcement, and publication discipline commensurate with institutional scale, risk environment, and cross-jurisdiction operation.
1.2.3 Custody and stewardship. The Council shall act as steward of the Diwān corpus and shall ensure that custody, access, and publication are governed by: (a) handling classes; (b) provenance discipline; (c) correction and supersession rules; and (d) safety-aware participation protections.
1.2.4 Transition discipline. Within twelve (12) months of the Effective Date, the Council shall complete a Diwān Corpus Transition Register identifying each designated Diwān artifact, dataset, template, protocol, report, media asset, or record set, and classifying each item as:
(a) Public Publication (open release, subject to redaction);
(b) Controlled Distribution (shared under access controls); or
(c) Restricted Custody (access-limited, safety-cleared, non-public by default).
1.2.5 Minimum metadata for each item. For each Diwān corpus item, the Council shall apply, at minimum:
(a) a unique revision identifier and version label;
(b) a provenance note (origin, authorship posture, date window, and chain-of-custody as safely possible);
(c) a method summary and limitations statement;
(d) an evidence posture classification (measured, reported, estimated, inferred) where applicable;
(e) a handling class (Public/Controlled/Restricted, with special constraints as needed);
(f) a challenge pathway and correction mechanism; and
(g) a supersession rule (if later replaced).
1.2.6 Verification and withdrawal. Materials that cannot be responsibly verified, that lack acceptable provenance, or that cannot be safely shared without credible harm risk shall remain Restricted or be withdrawn from active use, with a recorded disposition and rationale in the Transition Register. Withdrawal is not erasure: archival custody and a non-public audit trail shall be preserved unless prohibited by law.
1.2.7 No implied attribution. Succession does not create implied attribution of individual Diwān contributors, nor does it authorize retroactive exposure of any person’s identity, location, or affiliations. Where anonymity or confidentiality was relied upon, it shall remain protected by default under the handling rules of Part X.
1.2.8 Non-attribution and non-representation. Succession does not imply statehood, diplomatic status, governmental representation, or authority over any territory, population, public function, or political platform. The Council does not confer political legitimacy, and it does not function as a representative authority of any state or non-state actor.
1.3 Non-state nature and perimeter
1.3.1 Civilian, civic, technical institution. The Council is a civic, civilian, technical institution constituted for cooperation, standards, evidence, readiness, and public-interest capacity building across the diaspora and partner ecosystems.
1.3.2 Not a state actor. The Council is not a government, not a ministry, not a regulator, not a supervisory authority, not a political party, not a government-in-exile, and not a substitute for any competent public authority in any jurisdiction.
1.3.3 Authority by method, not mandate. The Council’s authority is institutional and methodological, derived from transparent standards, reproducible methods, correction discipline, and independent integrity oversight—not from ideology, coercion, diplomatic posture, or territorial claim.
1.3.4 No coercive powers. The Council has no coercive power and shall not claim investigatory powers beyond voluntary cooperation and lawful, consent-based research and peer review methods described in this Charter.
1.4 Seat and modalities
1.4.1 Principal seat. The Council’s principal seat shall be determined by the Governing Board and may be relocated as needed to preserve continuity, safety, legal compliance, and operational effectiveness.
1.4.2 Distributed continuity model. The Council may operate through multiple lawful operational hubs, Chapters, liaison arrangements, and secure virtual modalities to reduce single-jurisdiction dependency, improve resilience under disruption, and support equitable access across geographies and generations.
1.4.3 Host-country compliance. All operations—including Chapters, events, publications, data handling, contracting, and staffing—shall comply with applicable host-country law, including nonprofit governance, anti-discrimination, data protection, sanctions/export controls, and restrictions on political activity.
1.4.4 Secure operations posture. The Council shall adopt safety-aware operational modalities, including controlled convenings, handling classification, role-based attribution where necessary, and secure communications consistent with Part X.
1.5 Name, marks, credentials, and verification
1.5.1 Protected identity. The name “Iranian Diaspora Cooperation & Development Council (IDCDC),” the abbreviation “IDCDC,” and any emblem, seal, mark, credential, badge, certificate, verification statement, or directory listing issued by the Council are protected institutional identifiers governed by this Charter and applicable law.
1.5.2 Credential meaning. Any credential, badge, or verification issued by the Council shall state: (a) what it signifies; (b) scope and limitations; (c) validity period; (d) renewal requirements; (e) revocation triggers; and (f) non-endorsement language consistent with Part III.
1.5.3 Misuse and implied endorsement. Unauthorized use, implied endorsement, false affiliation, credential forgery, deceptive marketing, or misrepresentation of Council association constitutes a breach subject to enforcement, sanction, and public correction where safe, under Part XI.
1.5.4 Verification registry. The Council may maintain a verification registry for credentials and recognized entities, with disclosure tiers aligned to handling classes and safety constraints under Part X.
1.6 Definitions
For purposes of this Charter, the following definitions apply:
1.6.1 “Diaspora” means Iranians residing outside Iran, including multi-generational diaspora, newly arrived migrants, refugees, students, and persons in transit, regardless of legal status, subject to host-country law, consent posture, and safety constraints.
1.6.2 “Chapter” means a host-country or sub-national community cell recognized under Part IV to convene lawful local cooperation, deliver community capacity programs, and implement Council standards proportionate to context under the Council’s independence, handling, and integrity rules.
1.6.3 “College” means a discipline-based or sector-based community of practice recognized under Part IV and constituted to produce standards, toolkits, peer review capacity, measurement methods, curricula, and readiness practices within defined scopes.
1.6.4 “Standards” include methods, definitions, templates, toolkits, protocols, minimum controls, maturity tiers, and implementation guides issued under this Charter. Standards are non-binding unless adopted by competent authorities or partners within their own legal perimeters, and are always subject to limitations and non-execution rules under Part III.
1.6.5 “Indicators” means metrics, dashboards, statistical methods, measurement protocols, baseline notes, and reporting frameworks maintained under Part V, including data posture, reproducibility notes, limitations, and correction procedures.
1.6.6 “Peer Review” means a structured assessment conducted under Part V using published protocols, evidence standards, and conflict screening, resulting in findings, recommendations, and tracked follow-up actions with defined milestones and update cadence.
1.6.7 “Readiness Rail” means the staged portfolio and documentation discipline under Part VI through which initiatives are matured into implementable, auditable, and partner-executable portfolios without the Council executing regulated activities.
1.6.8 “Protected Participation” means safety-aware participation modalities, including confidentiality tiers, role-based attribution where necessary, anti-doxxing and harassment controls, secure reporting channels, data minimization, and risk-screened convening.
1.6.9 “Capture” means direct or indirect control, domination, coercion, steering, or undue influence—actual or reasonably perceived—by any government, political party or faction, corporation or corporate control group, donor bloc or commonly controlled donor group, religious institution, ideological school, or intelligence-linked proxy, compromising the Council’s independence, methods, staffing, publications, credentialing, procurement, or allocations.
1.6.10 “Coercion” means intimidation, threats, harassment, retaliation, surveillance pressure, infiltration, doxxing, blackmail, or any conduct intended to manipulate participation, silence speech, distort outputs, or compromise the safety or autonomy of Council members, sources, or partners.
1.6.11 “Designated Matters” means matters subject to enhanced safeguards under Part VIII due to elevated capture, safety, legal, financial, or reputational risk, including matters affecting constitutional invariants, senior appointments, donor caps, major publications, major sanctions, and any action contemplated under Part XIII.
1.6.12 “Material Influence” means any role, relationship, or contribution capable of affecting decisions, methods, funding, staffing, publication posture, procurement outcomes, or credentialing, including major donors, board members, senior staff, peer review leads, principal contractors, and partners with privileged access.
1.6.13 “Handling Classes” means information sensitivity tiers defined under Part X that govern access, storage, distribution, publication, retention, and incident response, including the minimum classes Public, Controlled, and Restricted, and any sub-classifications established by policy.
1.6.14 “Supersession” means formal replacement of a Council output with preserved revision history, scope-of-change note, reasoned change rationale, effective date, and—where safe—public notice, such that institutional memory is preserved and users can reliably identify the authoritative current version.
1.6.15 “Effective Date” means 1 January 2026 or such later date as adopted by the founding Board in the instrument of adoption, as referenced in Part XIV.
1.6.16 Interpretation. Headings are for convenience and do not affect interpretation. “Including” means including without limitation. Where safety requires, publication and disclosure obligations are satisfied through redacted summaries consistent with Part X, while preserving internal audit trails and governance accountability.
PART II — PURPOSES
2.1 Purposes
2.1.1 Core purpose. The Council exists to convert the distributed strength of Iranians worldwide into durable cooperation that produces measurable public benefit, protected participation, and implementation readiness that can be lawfully executed by competent partners when and where action is possible.
2.1.2 Public-interest function. The Council exists to reduce fragmentation, duplication, and transaction costs across the diaspora by providing shared infrastructure—standards, methods, records discipline, peer review capacity, and reusable digital public goods—so that collaboration becomes reliable, scalable, and corrigible.
2.1.3 Trust by method. The Council exists to increase trust through method-led outputs that are auditable, correctionable, and protected against capture, coercion, and misrepresentation, including disciplined publication, correction, and supersession.
2.1.4 Readiness without execution. The Council exists to raise the quality and implementability of initiatives by maintaining a staged Readiness Rail that transforms ideas into partner-executable portfolios—without the Council underwriting, soliciting, pooling, holding, routing, or disbursing funds, and without operating regulated markets.
2.1.5 Intergenerational continuity. The Council exists to sustain continuity across decades by institutionalizing mentorship, learning pathways, leadership renewal, and multilingual knowledge preservation so that diaspora capacity does not reset with each news cycle, migration wave, or leadership cohort.
2.1.6 Iran readiness window. The Council exists to maintain disciplined preparedness relevant to Iran—without asserting political authority, without executing in-country operations, and without regulated financial execution—so that any lawful opening, if it emerges, can be met with preparation rather than improvisation.
2.2 Objectives
2.2.1 Coordination outcomes. The Council shall pursue measurable improvements in diaspora coordination, including:
(a) increased cross-organizational collaboration across Chapters, Colleges, and partner institutions;
(b) reduced duplication of effort through shared templates, shared registries, and reusable toolkits; and
(c) improved speed-to-cooperation (the time from need identification to a documented, safety-cleared plan of action).
2.2.2 Quality and integrity outcomes. The Council shall pursue measurable improvements in the quality and integrity of diaspora programs and outputs, including:
(a) demonstrable uplift in safeguards, procurement integrity, and do-no-harm posture;
(b) increased consistency in recordkeeping, documentation, and decision traceability; and
(c) improved correction performance—timely identification, acknowledgment, and remediation of errors or method gaps.
2.2.3 Readiness outcomes. The Council shall pursue measurable improvements in implementability, evidenced by:
(a) readiness scoring and maturity progression across the Readiness Rail;
(b) completeness and auditability of documentation packs;
(c) quality of risk disclosure and scenario sensitivity analysis; and
(d) independent peer review findings and verified follow-up actions—without the Council soliciting, promoting, or executing finance.
2.2.4 Knowledge commons outcomes. The Council shall build and maintain multilingual digital public goods and institutional memory, evidenced by:
(a) growing inventories of curricula, templates, and implementation guides;
(b) translation and localization coverage across diaspora languages and contexts;
(c) adoption of Council toolkits by Chapters and partners; and
(d) intergenerational access pathways (youth and new arrivals) into skills, service, and leadership roles.
2.2.5 Partnership outcomes. The Council shall structure credible, non-captured cooperation with host-country institutions and partners, evidenced by:
(a) non-binding cooperation instruments that preserve independence;
(b) partner adherence to non-endorsement and communications integrity rules; and
(c) demonstrable public-interest outcomes delivered within lawful perimeters.
2.2.6 Resilience and safety outcomes. The Council shall pursue measurable improvements in diaspora resilience and protected participation, including:
(a) strengthened confidentiality and anti-doxxing protections;
(b) improved security posture of Chapter operations and sensitive programs;
(c) expanded participation across vulnerable and historically targeted communities; and
(d) increased trust as measured by retention, engagement, grievance resolution performance, and reduced manipulation incidents.
2.3 Mandate and scope of work
2.3.1 Mandate boundaries. The Council’s mandate is technical and civic: standards, evidence, readiness, peer review, capacity building, publication discipline, and protected participation. The Council shall not function as a political body, shall not claim public authority, and shall not cross into regulated execution.
2.3.2 Domains of work. Subject to Part III (non-execution perimeter) and Part X (handling and safety), the Council may operate in domains including, without limitation:
(a) Social wellbeing and human capital: education pathways, community health access, inclusion, settlement supports, workforce integration, and diaspora youth development;
(b) Economic mobility and productivity: entrepreneurship, SME enablement, skills mobility, professional credential bridging, diaspora business networks, and lawful market readiness support;
(c) Sustainability, climate adaptation, and disaster risk reduction: preparedness, recovery readiness, local resilience planning, and community-based adaptation methods;
(d) Critical infrastructure resilience: energy, water, transport, housing, food systems, digital systems, and continuity planning for community services, consistent with host-country law;
(e) Applied governance and delivery systems: procurement integrity, safeguards, auditability, monitoring and evaluation, operational readiness, and program management standards;
(f) Culture, language, and heritage continuity: multilingual archives, cultural programming readiness, minority language protection, and creative ecosystem enablement;
(g) Technology and digital public goods: open-source tooling (where safe), secure participation platforms, documentation systems, and training infrastructure;
(h) Independent media support and information resilience (non-operational): standards and training for verification, corrections discipline, source safety, and anti-disinformation literacy—without operating covert activity or violating legal restrictions.
2.3.3 Mode of operation. The Council advances its mandate through:
(a) standards issuance and maintenance;
(b) development and stewardship of digital public goods;
(c) indicators, dashboards, and periodic reporting;
(d) peer review with follow-up tracking;
(e) training, mentorship, and credential pathways;
(f) convenings and Chapters/Colleges coordination under protected participation rules; and
(g) readiness portfolio development for lawful partner execution.
2.3.4 Non-delegation of prohibited acts. The Council shall not evade its non-execution perimeter by delegating prohibited activities to agents under its control. Where collaboration with regulated actors is required, it shall occur only through lawful, arm’s-length arrangements that preserve the Council’s independence and do not create implied execution responsibility.
2.4 Beneficiaries and value commitment
2.4.1 Primary beneficiaries. The Council serves the diaspora as a community of record across generations and circumstances, including those newly arrived or in transit, and it does so under an inclusion-without-erasure doctrine that recognizes Iran’s full mosaic of identities, languages, faiths and none, genders, and generations.
2.4.2 Public benefit orientation. The Council shall prioritize work that produces measurable public benefit: improved wellbeing, resilience, civic capability, cultural continuity, opportunity, accountability, and safety—rather than symbolic action, factional mobilization, or reputational theatre.
2.4.3 Do-no-harm and safety primacy. Where the pursuit of visibility conflicts with safety, the Council shall choose safety-aware methods, controlled disclosure, and protected participation as the default posture.
2.5 Authority by method
2.5.1 Method-first legitimacy. The Council’s legitimacy is earned through: clear standards; reproducible indicators; disciplined peer review with tracked follow-up; transparent limitations; correction and supersession discipline; and independent integrity oversight.
2.5.2 Rejection of personality authority. The Council rejects authority by charisma, seniority, ideology, or factional leverage. It will not elevate individuals, patrons, or groups above published method, conflict controls, and institutional safeguards.
2.5.3 Corrigibility as strength. The Council treats correction as an operating discipline, not a reputational admission. When evidence changes, methods improve, or harm risks are discovered, the Council shall update, correct, or supersede outputs promptly and visibly, consistent with handling constraints.
2.5.4 Non-propagandistic posture. The Council’s outputs shall not be propaganda. Advocacy within the Council’s remit is evidence-led, method-governed, and bounded by strict non-partisanship and the non-execution perimeter.
PART III — INDEPENDENCE
3.1 Independence and anti-capture doctrine
3.1.1 Independence (hard rule). IDCDC is and shall remain independent of:
(a) any government, intelligence service, state-linked entity, or state proxy;
(b) any political party, candidate, faction, militia, or ideological movement (Iranian or non-Iranian);
(c) any corporation, corporate control group, or commercially coordinated bloc;
(d) any donor bloc or commonly controlled donor group;
(e) any religious institution, clerical authority, or sectarian governance structure; and
(f) any person or entity seeking to use IDCDC as an endorsement engine, a laundering vehicle, a surveillance surface, or a capture pathway.
3.1.2 Independence by design (structural enforcement). IDCDC shall be structured so that no external actor can reasonably be understood to control, dominate, or materially shape its agenda, methods, staffing, publications, credentialing, procurement, or resource allocation. Structural safeguards shall include, at minimum:
(a) donor concentration caps and beneficial-control screening;
(b) conflict disclosure and mandatory recusal rules;
(c) separation of integrity functions from operations;
(d) protected publication independence for methods and indicators;
(e) handling classes and safety-aware disclosure controls;
(f) stop-the-line authority for credible harm risk; and
(g) enforceable misrepresentation controls, including corrective notices and sanctions.
3.1.3 No conditional compliance. No contribution, partnership, sponsorship, or in-kind support may condition IDCDC’s methods, publications, credentialing decisions, peer review outcomes, procurement outcomes, staffing decisions, or integrity determinations. Any attempt at conditioning constitutes prohibited interference and triggers quarantine review under Parts IX and XI.
3.1.4 Engagement without capture. IDCDC may engage external actors only under written terms that:
(a) preserve IDCDC’s right to publish, correct, refuse, withdraw, quarantine funding, and enforce integrity measures without penalty;
(b) prohibit implied endorsement, political use, reputational laundering, and delegated propaganda;
(c) require non-endorsement language and communications integrity; and
(d) permit IDCDC to suspend or terminate engagement on integrity or safety grounds.
3.1.5 Anti-capture presumption. Where facts are ambiguous, IDCDC shall apply an anti-capture presumption: the burden lies on the proposing party to demonstrate that engagement will not create undue influence, safety exposure, or reputational laundering risk.
3.2 Non-partisanship with outcome discipline
3.2.1 Strict non-partisanship. IDCDC shall not:
(a) endorse, oppose, or campaign for any political party, candidate, faction, or electoral slate;
(b) conduct electoral mobilization, partisan fundraising, or partisan canvassing;
(c) allocate institutional resources to produce “platform advantage” for any faction; or
(d) host activities that are designed, framed, or reasonably interpreted as partisan campaigning.
3.2.2 No government-in-exile posture. IDCDC shall not present itself as a substitute for any sovereign authority, a representative government, a diplomatic body, or a consular service, and shall not claim political mandate over any territory, population, or public function.
3.2.3 Outcome discipline (not neutrality theatre). IDCDC is non-partisan but not indifferent. It stands for dignity, equal citizenship, lawful civic freedom, competence, transparency, measurable public benefit, and accountable institutions. IDCDC shall not provide legitimacy services—directly or indirectly—to abusive, corrupt, coercive, captured, or discriminatory practices.
3.2.4 Evidence-led public positioning. IDCDC may publish technical standards, indicators, peer review findings, and readiness materials that bear on public outcomes. Such outputs shall:
(a) remain method-governed and non-propagandistic;
(b) be framed as technical evidence and implementation guidance, not factional messaging;
(c) include scope, limitations, and correction pathways; and
(d) comply with handling classes and safety constraints.
3.2.5 Protection against weaponization. Where an IDCDC output is likely to be weaponized for partisan ends, IDCDC shall apply additional safeguards, including: controlled distribution, redaction, delayed publication, or an integrity notice clarifying permitted use and prohibitions on implied endorsement.
3.3 Civilian scope and lawful posture
3.3.1 Civilian institution. IDCDC is a civilian, civic, technical cooperation and readiness body. It conducts no armed activity, no paramilitary work, no covert operations, no intelligence gathering as a service, and no operational security functions.
3.3.2 Safety work is civic and defensive. Safety work is limited to protected participation, do-no-harm safeguards, continuity planning, digital hygiene, and resilience practices intended to reduce harm to members and communities.
3.3.3 Host-country law compliance (hard rule). IDCDC, its Chapters, its Colleges, and all recognized organs shall comply with applicable host-country law, including laws relating to nonprofit governance, anti-discrimination, data protection, sanctions and export controls, political activity restrictions, and charitable solicitation (where applicable).
3.3.4 No unlawful facilitation. IDCDC shall not facilitate or enable unlawful activity, evasion of lawful restrictions, or operational conduct that would place members at risk of prosecution, deportation, violence, or retaliation. Where uncertainty exists, IDCDC shall seek competent legal guidance and apply conservative safeguards.
3.4 Non-execution boundary and regulated-activity perimeter
3.4.1 Prohibited regulated activities. IDCDC shall not, directly or indirectly:
(a) underwrite, insure, reinsure, broker, place, or distribute insurance, securities, commodities, or other regulated products;
(b) custody, pool, route, hold, manage, or disburse funds on behalf of third parties;
(c) hold client monies, act as trustee, escrow agent, or payment intermediary;
(d) operate or manage markets, exchanges, settlement systems, or lending/credit platforms;
(e) solicit investments, promote financial products, or conduct financial promotions; or
(f) create a de facto regulated execution service through controlled affiliates, agents, or proxies.
3.4.2 Permitted readiness activities. Within the non-execution perimeter, IDCDC may:
(a) publish non-binding standards, toolkits, and readiness templates;
(b) develop diligence-grade documentation packs and safeguards frameworks;
(c) conduct peer reviews and maintain implementation trackers;
(d) produce indicators and dashboards;
(e) convene partners for readiness improvement; and
(f) support lawful counterpart mapping and governance design—without acting as the executor, arranger, custodian, or promoter.
3.4.3 Convening without solicitation. Convening shall not become execution, placement, brokerage, fundraising intermediation, or financial promotion. Where fundraising is permitted under host-country law for IDCDC’s own operating purposes, it shall be governed by donor integrity rules and shall not be represented as client-fund handling.
3.4.4 Separation doctrine. Any future execution vehicle (fund, facility, escrow entity, underwriting platform, market-facing operator, or similar) must be:
(a) legally separate from IDCDC;
(b) independently governed with its own compliance and risk functions;
(c) regulated and licensed as required in its jurisdictions; and
(d) subject to enhanced safeguards and non-transfer of legitimacy rules under Part XIII.
3.5 Non-representation, non-reliance, and liability posture
3.5.1 No representation. IDCDC does not represent Iran, any host country, any public authority, or any political constituency, and shall not allow others to imply that it does.
3.5.2 No professional advice. IDCDC outputs are informational and non-binding and do not constitute legal, investment, tax, immigration, or professional advice. Users remain responsible for obtaining competent advice appropriate to their jurisdiction and circumstances.
3.5.3 Reliance limitations with correction discipline. To the maximum extent permitted by law, IDCDC disclaims liability for third-party reliance, while maintaining good-faith quality gates, transparent limitations, and mandatory correction and supersession discipline as a matter of institutional integrity.
3.5.4 No implied fiduciary duties. IDCDC shall not assume fiduciary duties to third parties through convening, publication, credentialing, or readiness assistance, and shall include appropriate reliance and perimeter notices in standards and public outputs.
3.6 Integrity commitments and refusal authority
3.6.1 Refusal and withdrawal authority. IDCDC may refuse, suspend, withdraw, or publicly correct its relationship to any person, partner, Chapter, College, donor, or output where:
(a) capture risk is credible;
(b) misrepresentation occurs;
(c) safety exposure materially increases;
(d) do-no-harm safeguards are breached;
(e) coercion or intimidation is detected; or
(f) the integrity of methods, indicators, peer review, or publication discipline is compromised.
3.6.2 No legitimacy services. IDCDC shall not be used to certify power, launder reputations, sanitize abusive conduct, or provide moral cover for coercive or corrupt practices. Credentials, recognition, and partnership language shall be narrowly drafted and revocable.
3.6.3 Protected participation as an integrity pillar. IDCDC shall treat intimidation, infiltration, surveillance, doxxing, and coercion as integrity threats. Prevention, detection, and response measures are core institutional duties, not optional security enhancements.
3.7 Transparency, discretion, and safety balance
3.7.1 Transparency by default; safety by design. IDCDC shall publish methods and outcomes to the maximum extent compatible with safety and law. Where disclosure creates credible risk, IDCDC shall publish redacted summaries and preserve full internal audit trails under Restricted handling.
3.7.2 Role-based attribution. Where identity exposure creates risk, IDCDC shall use role markers and controlled identity mapping, ensuring institutional accountability without unnecessary personal exposure, consistent with Part X.
3.7.3 Correction is mandatory. When material error, manipulation, or misrepresentation is discovered, IDCDC shall correct and, where needed, supersede affected outputs promptly, with an integrity notice and change record consistent with handling rules.
3.8 Conflict-of-interest, influence, and integrity screening
3.8.1 Disclosure duty (universal). Any person holding membership, credential, office, employment, contracted role, or peer review responsibility shall disclose, on a continuing basis, any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest that could reasonably affect—or appear to affect—independence, judgment, publication posture, procurement decisions, credentialing outcomes, or allocation of resources.
3.8.2 Material Influence classification. IDCDC shall maintain a formal process to classify “Material Influence” relationships, including, at minimum:
(a) major donors and commonly controlled donor groups;
(b) board members, senior officers, and integrity office leads;
(c) peer review leads, standards authors, and indicators leads;
(d) contractors and vendors with privileged access; and
(e) partners whose brand association could materially shape public interpretation of IDCDC outputs.
3.8.3 Recusal and restriction. Where a conflict or Material Influence is present, IDCDC shall apply proportionate mitigation, including:
(a) mandatory recusal from deliberation, drafting, voting, or selection;
(b) role restriction or reassignment;
(c) separation of access to sensitive materials;
(d) publication of an integrity note or disclosure (subject to safety); or
(e) exclusion from the relevant activity, where mitigation is inadequate.
3.8.4 No paid influence over method. No person may be paid by a donor, partner, faction, or external actor to influence standards, peer review outcomes, indicators, publication timing, or credentialing decisions. Violations constitute sanctionable misconduct.
3.8.5 Integrity screening of sensitive roles. Appointment or selection to sensitive roles (including integrity offices, Method & Statistics Council, peer review leads, and handling/safety officers) requires integrity screening proportionate to risk, including beneficial-control and influence checks where lawful and feasible.
3.9 Anti-infiltration and anti-coercion posture
3.9.1 Threat-aware governance. IDCDC recognizes that diaspora institutions may be targeted by intimidation, infiltration, surveillance, disinformation, coercion, blackmail, and reputational sabotage. IDCDC shall treat these threats as foreseeable governance conditions and shall design participation, publication, and decision processes accordingly.
3.9.2 No compelled exposure. No member, volunteer, source, or contributor shall be compelled to disclose identity, location, employment, immigration status, family details, or other sensitive personal information as a condition of participation, except where legally required and safety-cleared under Part X.
3.9.3 Infiltration indicators and response. IDCDC shall maintain procedures to:
(a) detect manipulation and coordinated influence attempts;
(b) identify patterns consistent with infiltration, coercion, or reputational laundering;
(c) quarantine access pending review; and
(d) escalate findings to the appropriate integrity office for action under Parts X and XI.
3.9.4 Non-retaliation and protection. Reports of intimidation, coercion, infiltration, or doxxing shall be handled under protected participation modalities. Retaliation against reporters is sanctionable.
3.10 Public communications and political safety boundaries
3.10.1 Public voice discipline. IDCDC public communications shall be limited to method, evidence, standards, readiness, safeguards, and measurable outcomes. Communications shall not be used as partisan messaging, factional amplification, or mobilization.
3.10.2 No incitement; no operational instruction. IDCDC shall not publish content that provides operational guidance for violence, unlawful activity, or evasion of lawful controls, nor content that could reasonably be interpreted as incitement or targeted harassment.
3.10.3 Crisis communications caution. During crises, IDCDC shall prioritize verification, harm reduction, and safety. Where facts are uncertain, IDCDC shall publish uncertainty explicitly or refrain from publication until verification thresholds are met.
3.10.4 Brand and endorsement control. IDCDC shall actively prevent the use of its name, marks, outputs, or credentials to imply endorsement of political actors, factions, or campaigns. Misuse triggers corrective notices and sanctions under Part XI.
3.11 Interoperability with lawful institutions (without surrender)
3.11.1 Partnerable by design. IDCDC shall maintain a posture of lawful cooperation with universities, municipalities, professional bodies, foundations, and responsible private partners where such cooperation advances public benefit and diaspora resilience.
3.11.2 No delegation of authority. Cooperation does not delegate authority to IDCDC and does not grant IDCDC authority over partners. Cooperation instruments shall be non-binding unless expressly and lawfully executed by the parties, and shall contain non-endorsement and independence clauses.
3.11.3 Right of refusal and exit. IDCDC retains the right to refuse partnership, refuse funding, or terminate cooperation where integrity, safety, or capture risk is credible, without reputational penalty clauses or financial clawbacks that would compromise independence.
3.12 Interpretive clause: primacy of independence and safety
3.12.1 Primacy rule. Where provisions of this Charter could be interpreted in tension, IDCDC shall interpret them to preserve, in order of priority:
(a) protected participation and do-no-harm safeguards;
(b) independence and anti-capture doctrine;
(c) non-partisanship and non-representation;
(d) non-execution perimeter; and
(e) method integrity, correctionability, and record discipline.
3.12.2 Survival of safeguards. The independence, non-partisanship, protected participation, and non-execution provisions of this Part III survive any restructuring, federation expansion, partnership arrangement, or leadership transition, and bind all Chapters, Colleges, officers, members, and credentialed participants as a condition of recognition or participation.
PART IV — FEDERATION
4.1 Federation design; subsidiarity with safeguards
4.1.1 Federated institution. IDCDC operates as a federation comprised of:
(a) Chapters (host-country and sub-national community cells), and
(b) Colleges (discipline-based communities of practice),
coordinated by the central organs established under Part VII and governed by the safeguards, records discipline, and due process requirements of Parts VIII–XI.
4.1.2 Subsidiarity rule. Decisions shall be made at the lowest competent level consistent with: (a) independence; (b) protected participation; (c) method integrity; (d) non-execution perimeter; and (e) lawful compliance. Local adaptation is permitted; method drift is not.
4.1.3 Single-standard, multi-context operation. The federation exists to enable lawful local action under shared minimum standards, shared records discipline, and shared integrity gates—so that plural communities can cooperate without being forced into uniformity.
4.1.4 No local sovereignty claims. Chapters and Colleges are organs of civic cooperation. They shall not present themselves as diplomatic, consular, governmental, or quasi-governmental bodies, and shall not claim representative authority over any population.
4.2 Chapters: purpose, recognition, and operating requirements
4.2.1 Purpose. A Chapter is the local interface of IDCDC within a host jurisdiction. Each Chapter exists to:
(a) convene lawful local cooperation and member services;
(b) translate IDCDC standards into implementable local practice;
(c) maintain protected participation modalities suited to local risk;
(d) operate intergenerational pathways for learning, mentorship, and leadership renewal; and
(e) deliver—or enable delivery of—programs consistent with this Charter, strictly within the non-execution perimeter.
4.2.2 Recognition states. Chapters may be designated by the Board under published criteria as:
(a) Provisional (new or rebuilding; limited scope; enhanced oversight);
(b) Recognized (meets minimum governance and integrity requirements);
(c) Conditional (recognized but subject to corrective action plan, time-bound); or
(d) De-recognized (not permitted to operate under IDCDC name or marks).
4.2.3 Recognition criteria (minimum). Recognition requires demonstrated capacity for:
(a) compliance with host-country law;
(b) adherence to independence, non-partisanship, and non-execution boundaries;
(c) handling and safety posture appropriate to local risk;
(d) basic internal controls and financial transparency;
(e) grievance and remedy pathways; and
(f) records discipline sufficient for accountability.
4.2.4 Minimum Chapter governance. Each Chapter shall maintain, at minimum:
(a) a Chapter Council (local deliberative and operational steering);
(b) a Treasurer function with basic internal controls and segregation of duties;
(c) an Integrity Liaison accountable to ECOI/ADI/SOO for local compliance;
(d) a Handling & Safety Officer (or delegated function) trained in Part X; and
(e) a Chapter Secretary/Records Officer responsible for minutes, registers, and versioning of local outputs.
4.2.5 Local constitutional alignment. Each Chapter shall adopt local bylaws or rules of procedure consistent with this Charter, including: (a) conflict disclosures; (b) donor caps and acceptance rules; (c) protected participation; (d) election/selection procedures; (e) records discipline; and (f) sanction and appeal pathways compatible with Part VIII.
4.2.6 Continuity requirements. Each Chapter shall maintain:
(a) a succession plan for key roles;
(b) minimum viable operating procedures for continuity under disruption; and
(c) secure access recovery procedures consistent with Part X.
4.2.7 Quality gates and oversight. Chapters are subject to:
(a) periodic integrity sampling and compliance checks;
(b) peer review participation (voluntary unless elected mandatory by the Chapter); and
(c) corrective action directives issued by integrity offices within their remit, subject to appeal clocks.
4.2.8 Prohibited local practices. Chapters shall not:
(a) conduct electoral or partisan activity under IDCDC name;
(b) accept funding conditioned on altering method, publications, credentialing, or integrity decisions;
(c) create member exposure through unsafe rosters or doxxable records;
(d) operate regulated financial activities; or
(e) permit brand misuse, implied endorsement, or misrepresentation.
4.3 Colleges: purpose, independence, and output discipline
4.3.1 Purpose. A College is a community of practice constituted to convert diaspora expertise into reusable institutional capability. Colleges exist to:
(a) author and maintain standards and toolkits;
(b) build peer review capacity and rosters of screened reviewers;
(c) develop readiness methods and documentation packs;
(d) improve measurement quality, indicators, and auditability; and
(e) sustain training pathways and mentorship ladders.
4.3.2 Method independence (hard rule). Colleges operate under the publication independence protections of Part VII and shall be insulated from donor direction, factional pressure, reputational coercion, and editorial manipulation.
4.3.3 College governance (minimum). Each College shall maintain:
(a) a College Convenor (technical coordination);
(b) a Standards Editor (version control and clarity);
(c) a Peer Review Lead (conflict-screened; roster management); and
(d) a Data/Methods Steward (measurement integrity, reproducibility posture).
4.3.4 Outputs (minimum content rules). Any College output intended for external use shall include:
(a) scope and intended users;
(b) definitions and minimum controls;
(c) evidence posture and limitations;
(d) implementation guidance and localization parameters;
(e) safety/handling classification; and
(f) version identifiers, correction pathways, and supersession rules.
4.3.5 Conflict screening for authorship and review. Authors, reviewers, and editors shall be screened for conflicts. Where conflicts exist, mitigation (recusal, role restriction, disclosure, or exclusion) is mandatory.
4.3.6 College establishment and modification. The creation, merger, or dissolution of a College shall be approved by the Board. Where the change materially affects method authority, credentialing posture, or public legitimacy, it is a Designated Matter under Part VIII.
4.4 Membership architecture; classes; rights and duties
4.4.1 Membership as civic capacity. Membership exists to build durable cooperation, not to create status, factional advantage, or implied legitimacy. Membership is conditioned on adherence to this Charter.
4.4.2 Membership classes. IDCDC may admit:
(a) Individual Members (general membership);
(b) Fellows (credentialed individuals with demonstrated competence and integrity fitness);
(c) Institutional Members (lawful entities aligned to Charter principles);
(d) Affiliates (limited-scope participation without governance rights, as defined); and
(e) Observers (time-bound, purpose-bound participation; no governance rights unless explicitly granted).
4.4.3 Eligibility baseline. Admission requires attestation to:
(a) independence and non-partisanship;
(b) conflict disclosure duty and recusal compliance;
(c) protected participation and handling rules;
(d) non-execution perimeter;
(e) misrepresentation prohibitions; and
(f) conduct expectations, including do-no-harm.
4.4.4 Membership rights (non-absolute). Subject to handling rules and safety constraints, members may have rights to:
(a) participate in Chapter and College activities;
(b) access public and controlled materials consistent with clearance;
(c) propose work items and standards improvements;
(d) be considered for service roles subject to screening; and
(e) use member designation as permitted under Part XI (without implied endorsement).
4.4.5 Membership duties. Members shall:
(a) maintain truthful disclosures;
(b) comply with recusals and role restrictions;
(c) protect the safety of others, including anti-doxxing discipline;
(d) respect records and publication discipline;
(e) refrain from factional coercion or manipulation; and
(f) avoid using IDCDC for personal, partisan, or commercial capture.
4.4.6 Fees and waivers (principled access). IDCDC may set membership fees to sustain operations. Fee waivers, reductions, or service-credit arrangements may be permitted to preserve inclusive access, provided that: (a) donor or sponsor substitution does not create capture; and (b) waivers are administered transparently under integrity oversight.
4.5 Credentialing, competence pathways, and service eligibility
4.5.1 Credential purpose. Credentials exist to signal method competence and integrity fitness for roles such as peer review, standards authorship, handling, or readiness assessment—never as political legitimacy.
4.5.2 Credential categories. Credentialing may include, as established by policy consistent with this Charter:
(a) Fellowship (domain competence + integrity fitness);
(b) Reviewer Certification (peer review protocol competence);
(c) Handling Clearance (Part X training + need-to-know); and
(d) Readiness Assessor Qualification (R-level evaluation capability).
4.5.3 Periodic renewal. Credentials shall be time-bound and subject to renewal, continuing education, and integrity review. Lapsed credentials may not be represented as current.
4.5.4 Service eligibility screening. Eligibility for sensitive roles requires conflict screening, influence checks where lawful and feasible, and adherence to protected participation requirements. Individuals subject to credible coercion or unmanaged conflicts may be restricted from sensitive roles to protect both the individual and the institution.
4.5.5 Appeals. Denials, suspensions, or removals of credentials shall be subject to due process clocks and appeal rights under Part VIII, with safety-aware evidence disclosure.
4.6 Inclusion, plurality, and intergenerational continuity
4.6.1 Inclusion without erasure (constitutional). IDCDC shall be structurally inclusive across Iran’s full mosaic of identities, languages, regions, faiths and none, genders, generations, and political histories in diaspora. Inclusion is achieved through method, access pathways, and protected participation—not through forced consensus.
4.6.2 No structural exclusion. No identity group may be structurally excluded from participation pathways, including mentorship, training access, peer review pipelines, and leadership consideration, subject to integrity and competence gates.
4.6.3 Intergenerational design. IDCDC shall maintain explicit pipelines for:
(a) youth and early-career members;
(b) newly arrived migrants and refugees (where lawful and safe); and
(c) multi-generational diaspora continuity,
including mentorship ladders, leadership apprenticeships, and skills pathways embedded in Colleges and Chapters.
4.6.4 Language and accessibility. IDCDC shall pursue multilingual access and culturally competent practice. Where translation is incomplete, the limitation shall be disclosed and improved as an institutional duty.
4.6.5 Participation metrics and correction. Subject to safety constraints, IDCDC shall maintain indicators tracking participation breadth, leadership renewal, and inclusion outcomes. Persistent exclusion patterns constitute a performance and integrity risk requiring corrective action plans.
4.7 Grievance, remedy, and protected participation within the federation
4.7.1 Local grievance channels. Each Chapter and College shall maintain an accessible grievance channel aligned to the Safeguards & Ombudsperson Office (SOO), including anonymous or confidential options where risk exists.
4.7.2 Remedy posture. Remedies may include corrective action, mediation, role restrictions, protection measures, sanctions, and—where necessary—referral to competent authorities, subject to law and safety.
4.7.3 Non-retaliation. Retaliation against complainants, sources, whistleblowers, or integrity reporters is prohibited and sanctionable.
4.7.4 Escalation and override. Where credible harm risk, capture risk, or handling breach exists, SOO may impose interim protective measures under stop-the-line authority (Part XI), and integrity offices may issue binding compliance directives within remit, subject to appeal clocks.
4.8 Use of name, marks, and affiliation statements by members and organs
4.8.1 Controlled designation. The use of “IDCDC Chapter,” “IDCDC College,” “IDCDC Fellow,” or similar designations is permitted only while recognition/credential status is current and in good standing.
4.8.2 No implied endorsement. Members and organs shall not imply IDCDC endorsement of political actors, candidates, factions, commercial products, fundraising campaigns, or regulated financial activities.
4.8.3 Immediate correction duty. Any misuse or public confusion must be corrected promptly. Failure to correct is sanctionable under Part XI.
4.9 Suspension, de-recognition, and continuity of obligations
4.9.1 Grounds. Chapters, Colleges, and members may be suspended or de-recognized for:
(a) breach of independence or non-partisanship;
(b) unsafe exposure or handling violations;
(c) capture risk, coercion risk unmanaged, or material misrepresentation;
(d) financial misconduct or refusal of audit/cooperation;
(e) repeated method manipulation or publication interference; or
(f) retaliation, harassment, or doxxing.
4.9.2 Due process. Adverse actions shall follow Part VIII due process clocks, with safety-aware evidence disclosure.
4.9.3 Survival of restrictions. Upon suspension or de-recognition, obligations relating to confidentiality, handling, and non-misrepresentation survive and remain enforceable.
PART V — STANDARDS
5.1 Standards corpus; authority by method; adoption posture
5.1.1 Standards as the operating language. IDCDC shall develop, maintain, and continuously improve a corpus of Standards designed to: (a) reduce coordination friction; (b) raise quality and comparability; (c) protect safety and independence; and (d) increase implementability for lawful partners—without IDCDC executing regulated activity.
5.1.2 Non-binding by default. Standards are technical instruments and are non-binding unless voluntarily adopted by a Chapter, College, member institution, or lawful partner within its own legal perimeter.
5.1.3 Method authority rule. IDCDC’s authority is derived from: (a) clarity of definitions; (b) reproducibility posture; (c) peer review and follow-up tracking; (d) transparent limitations; and (e) correction and supersession discipline. Standards shall not be issued as ideology, propaganda, factional messaging, or reputational display.
5.1.4 Tiered structure. Standards shall be issued, where appropriate, as tiered instruments including:
(a) Core Minimum (non-negotiable controls required for integrity and safety);
(b) Enhanced Controls (recommended measures for higher-risk or higher-scale work); and
(c) Exemplars (reference implementations, templates, or case patterns).
5.1.5 Localization without drift. Each Standard shall define a “core minimum” plus “localization parameters” permitting host-country adaptation while preserving comparability and integrity. Any localization shall be recorded, versioned, and auditable.
5.1.6 Misuse-resistant design. Standards shall include explicit statements prohibiting: (a) political endorsement; (b) regulated execution under IDCDC branding; (c) unsafe identification of vulnerable persons; and (d) any use that enables intimidation, surveillance, or coercion.
5.2 Standard issuance requirements; format; limitations; safety posture
5.2.1 Mandatory elements. Every Standard issued for external or federation-wide use shall include, at minimum:
(a) Purpose and intended users;
(b) Scope and out-of-scope statements;
(c) Definitions and controlled vocabulary;
(d) Minimum controls and acceptance criteria;
(e) Evidence requirements (what must be shown);
(f) Data posture and handling class (Part X);
(g) Security and safety considerations (including protected participation);
(h) Conflict and integrity considerations (including donor influence risks);
(i) Implementation guidance and localization parameters;
(j) Limitations and non-reliance disclaimers, including non-execution boundary; and
(k) Version identifiers, correction pathways, and supersession rules.
5.2.2 Safety-first publication. Publication shall be maximized to the extent compatible with safety, law, and credible risk. Where risk exists, IDCDC shall publish redacted versions and preserve restricted audit trails.
5.2.3 Human-centered usability. Standards shall be written to be operationally usable by practitioners and decision-makers, not merely theoretically correct. Complexity that cannot be executed reliably is treated as a safety and integrity risk.
5.3 Digital public goods; licensing posture; controlled release discipline
5.3.1 Mandate. IDCDC shall build and maintain multilingual digital public goods (“DPGs”) to industrialize cooperation and readiness, including: curricula; training modules; translation libraries; governance templates; procurement and safeguards toolkits; monitoring and evaluation frameworks; readiness documentation packs; and cultural preservation archives.
5.3.2 Provenance and integrity requirements. Every DPG shall include: (a) provenance notes and authorship posture; (b) license terms and usage restrictions; (c) version identifiers and release notes; (d) handling class and access controls; and (e) a misuse-risk statement.
5.3.3 Open by default; safety by design. Open release is preferred where lawful and safe. Where openness creates credible risk (e.g., enabling targeting, exposing vulnerable communities, or facilitating infiltration), IDCDC shall employ:
(a) controlled distribution;
(b) delayed publication;
(c) redacted public summaries; and/or
(d) restricted custody with internal audit trails.
5.3.4 No personal-data monetization. DPGs shall not be used to monetize diaspora data or to create surveillance exposure. Data minimization and privacy protection are mandatory institutional duties.
5.3.5 Intergenerational continuity design. DPGs shall be structured to outlast individuals: modular, maintained, translated, and documented so that new cohorts can adopt and improve them without dependence on any single founder or team.
5.4 Indicators and dashboards; measurement integrity; corrigibility
5.4.1 Indicators function. IDCDC shall maintain an indicators and measurement function to produce: (a) baselines; (b) periodic updates; (c) comparable dashboards across Chapters and programs; and (d) an annual flagship report on diaspora cooperation, resilience, and readiness—subject to handling rules.
5.4.2 Measurement integrity rules. Indicators shall be developed and maintained under the Method & Statistics Council (Part VII) and shall:
(a) document sources, sampling posture, and limitations;
(b) distinguish measured facts, modeled estimates, and narrative interpretation;
(c) include reproducibility posture appropriate to the sensitivity class; and
(d) define explicit correction procedures.
5.4.3 Safety-aware data posture. IDCDC shall prefer aggregation and safe proxies. Individual-level identification is prohibited unless: (a) legally required; (b) explicitly consented; and (c) safety-cleared under Part X, with Restricted handling by default.
5.4.4 Anti-manipulation rule. Attempts to manipulate baselines, dashboards, scoring, peer review outcomes, or publication framing are integrity breaches subject to sanctions under Part XI.
5.4.5 No performative metrics. IDCDC shall reject vanity indicators. Metrics must be decision-useful, auditable, and aligned to the Council’s purposes: trust, reduced fragmentation, broadened participation, improved readiness quality, and measured resilience outcomes.
5.5 Peer review; integrity screening; follow-up tracking; fairness
5.5.1 Peer review as institutional backbone. IDCDC shall operate a structured peer review function to assess Standards, major publications, readiness portfolios, and Chapter/College maturity—subject to handling constraints and safety requirements.
5.5.2 Peer review protocols (mandatory). Each peer review shall be conducted under a published protocol specifying:
(a) scope and evaluation questions;
(b) evidence standards and admissibility;
(c) reviewer selection criteria and conflict screening;
(d) stakeholder participation and protected participation options;
(e) findings format and grading posture (where used); and
(f) follow-up cadence and closure criteria.
5.5.3 Conflict screening and independence. Reviewers, leads, and editors shall be conflict-screened. Where conflicts exist, mitigation is mandatory (recusal, disclosure, role restriction, or replacement). Donors and factional actors may not appoint reviewers or shape findings.
5.5.4 Evidence separation. Reports shall clearly separate:
(a) verified evidence;
(b) stakeholder submissions; and
(c) analytic judgment.
Where disclosure creates credible risk, IDCDC shall publish a redacted rationale while preserving restricted audit records.
5.5.5 Follow-up tracking. Peer review is incomplete without follow-up. IDCDC shall maintain a tracked action register for recommendations, including status, responsible parties, time bounds, and closure criteria—subject to handling and safety constraints.
5.5.6 Voluntary participation; fairness when mandatory. Participation is voluntary unless a Chapter/College elects mandatory participation for itself, in which case due process applies: notice, opportunity to respond, challenge windows, and appeal pathways under Part VIII.
5.6 Publication discipline; versioning; correction; supersession; recordkeeping
5.6.1 Version control as constitutional practice. All public-facing outputs shall carry: (a) version identifiers; (b) dates; (c) handling class; and (d) change notes suitable for users to understand what changed and why.
5.6.2 Public registry of record. IDCDC shall maintain a public-facing registry of current documents and their superseded predecessors, with safety-aware redactions permitted but not used to conceal material methodological changes.
5.6.3 Correction duty. Material errors require timely correction. Corrections shall:
(a) identify the error;
(b) state what changed;
(c) provide revised version identifiers; and
(d) record the effective date.
Corrections are mandatory discipline, not reputational admission.
5.6.4 Supersession is not deletion. Superseded items remain preserved in institutional custody with provenance, revision history, and rationale. Where public access to superseded items is unsafe, internal custody remains mandatory.
5.6.5 Publication independence. Publication decisions and technical content are protected from donor and factional interference. Attempts to pressure, suppress, distort, or coerce publication constitute sanctionable misconduct.
5.6.6 Right to pause. The Method & Statistics Council may issue a binding notice to pause publication where reproducibility, integrity, or safety cannot be satisfied, until corrective actions are completed.
5.7 Knowledge commons; training pathways; civic capacity building
5.7.1 Knowledge commons mandate. IDCDC shall maintain a multilingual knowledge commons that serves as: (a) an institutional memory; (b) a training library; and (c) a standards and readiness reference base for Chapters, Colleges, and partners.
5.7.2 Training and credential alignment. Training content shall be aligned with credential pathways under Part IV, including reviewer training, handling training, readiness assessment training, and safeguards training.
5.7.3 Minimum training obligations. Individuals serving in sensitive roles (peer review, handling, integrity liaison, readiness assessor) shall complete mandatory training and periodic refreshers proportional to risk.
5.7.4 Community co-production. The knowledge commons may incorporate member contributions under controlled authorship and review rules, with proper attribution where safe, and strict anti-plagiarism and provenance discipline.
PART VI — THE READINESS RAIL
6.1 Purpose; non-execution boundary; counterpart readiness
6.1.1 Purpose. The Readiness Rail is IDCDC’s staged, auditable discipline for converting ideas into implementable portfolios that lawful partners can execute responsibly within their own legal perimeters. The Rail exists to reduce fragmentation, raise delivery quality, compress diligence, improve comparability, and protect communities from improvisation, capture, and harm.
6.1.2 Non-execution boundary (hard rule). The Readiness Rail does not constitute execution. IDCDC does not underwrite, custody, pool, route, hold, or disburse funds; does not solicit investments; and does not operate regulated markets. The Rail produces readiness artifacts, standards, evidence posture, safeguards, and audit trails so that competent authorities and regulated actors can execute responsibly if and when they elect to do so.
6.1.3 Counterpart orientation. Readiness artifacts shall be structured so they are usable by counterpart institutions (municipalities, universities, charities, foundations, multilaterals, professional bodies, regulated entities) without translation into bespoke formats. Readiness documentation shall be designed to survive leadership changes, jurisdictional shifts, and operational disruption.
6.1.4 Integrity and safety primacy. Readiness is invalid where it compromises protected participation, violates handling classes, enables intimidation, or introduces capture risk. “Faster” is never permitted to mean “less safe” or “less corrigible.”
6.2 Readiness levels (R1–R5); minimum evidence; graduation rules
6.2.1 Readiness ladder. IDCDC shall maintain a staged readiness ladder with minimum evidence requirements. Advancement is earned by documented completeness, safeguards posture, and auditability—not by urgency, popularity, or donor preference.
6.2.2 R1 — Concept-Ready (clarity before momentum). Minimum requirements include:
(a) problem definition and scope;
(b) intended beneficiaries and equity considerations;
(c) initial feasibility and constraints;
(d) preliminary risk scan (safety, legal, reputational, operational);
(e) delivery hypothesis and high-level logic model;
(f) stakeholder map with do-no-harm considerations;
(g) initial data posture and handling class recommendation.
6.2.3 R2 — Program-Ready (design before commitment). Minimum requirements include:
(a) theory of change and outcomes framework;
(b) governance model and decision rights;
(c) baseline indicators and measurement plan (v0);
(d) stakeholder engagement plan and consent posture;
(e) safeguards pre-screen (environmental/social/conflict sensitivity);
(f) initial grievance and remedy channel design;
(g) recordkeeping plan and document index;
(h) preliminary budget envelope and resourcing assumptions.
6.2.4 R3 — Implementation-Ready (operability before launch). Minimum requirements include:
(a) delivery model and operating plan;
(b) procurement plan and integrity controls (Part VI.5);
(c) staffing and capability plan, including succession;
(d) safeguards plan and mitigation measures;
(e) live grievance and remedy channel (or launch-ready design);
(f) monitoring, evaluation, and learning plan with cadence;
(g) partner mapping and legal-perimeter checks (non-execution confirmation);
(h) diligence-grade documentation pack sufficient for lawful partner review.
6.2.5 R4 — Financing-Ready (diligence-grade portfolio posture). Minimum requirements include:
(a) full costing and unit economics (as relevant);
(b) risk disclosure and scenario sensitivities (including downside cases);
(c) implementation schedule, milestones, and critical path;
(d) audit-trail design and reporting templates;
(e) lawful counterpart identification and execution perimeter mapping;
(f) transparency posture and disclosure tier selection;
(g) verification/assurance plan proportionate to risk;
(h) conflicts, donor exposure, and capture-risk assessment with mitigations.
6.2.6 R5 — Performance-Ready (accountability before scaling). Minimum requirements include:
(a) live reporting cadence and dashboard operation;
(b) results framework active with baseline-to-outcome measurement;
(c) corrective-action loop and change-control discipline;
(d) independent assurance plan and periodic review schedule;
(e) sustainability, handover, and institutionalization plan;
(f) continuity plan for disruption, leadership change, and cyber incidents;
(g) documented lessons learned and revision proposals for Standards/DPGs.
6.2.7 Graduation rules. Advancement requires: (a) completeness against minimum requirements; (b) handling compliance; (c) conflict screening; and (d) safeguards clearance appropriate to risk. No readiness level may be “waived” by donor urgency, media pressure, or factional direction.
6.3 Portfolio architecture; documentation packs; comparability design
6.3.1 Portfolio concept. A “portfolio” may include one or more initiatives that share a domain, geography, beneficiary cohort, or delivery pathway. Portfolios shall be modular so that components can be executed, paused, or corrected without collapsing the whole.
6.3.2 Documentation pack discipline. Every R2+ initiative shall maintain a living documentation pack containing, at minimum:
(a) portfolio synopsis;
(b) governance and decision log;
(c) stakeholder engagement log;
(d) safeguards register;
(e) risk register;
(f) procurement plan and conflict disclosures;
(g) M&E plan and baselines;
(h) handling classification and access roster;
(i) change log and supersession notes.
6.3.3 Comparability layer. IDCDC shall define comparability conventions across portfolios (common fields, definitions, maturity markers, and evidence posture) so Chapters and partners can compare readiness quality without forcing uniformity of local implementation.
6.3.4 Correctionability by design. Documentation packs shall preserve correction and supersession history. Silent edits to readiness evidence are prohibited; all material changes require logged revisions.
6.4 Safeguards minima; do-no-harm; protected participation integration
6.4.1 Mandatory safeguards baseline. For any readiness work, IDCDC shall apply safeguards proportionate to risk, including:
(a) inclusion and non-discrimination;
(b) protection of vulnerable persons;
(c) community engagement and consent posture;
(d) conflict sensitivity and polarization risk;
(e) environmental and climate risk screening;
(f) data protection, confidentiality, and source protection;
(g) grievance and remedy mechanisms;
(h) anti-retaliation and anti-doxxing controls;
(i) child safeguarding where applicable;
(j) accessibility and disability inclusion where applicable.
6.4.2 Safety gates. Initiatives that create credible risk of targeting, retaliation, infiltration, or coercion shall be: (a) redesigned; (b) reclassified to higher handling class; (c) moved to controlled distribution; or (d) paused or withdrawn under stop-the-line authority (Part XI), with an internal record of rationale.
6.4.3 Duty to refuse. IDCDC shall refuse or quarantine readiness work where the delivery model requires coercion, discrimination, unlawful activity, or the compromise of protected participation.
6.4.4 Safeguards evidence. R3+ initiatives must include evidence that safeguards are not merely stated but operational: trained personnel, documented procedures, and functioning channels.
6.5 Procurement integrity; anti-capture controls; partner selection discipline
6.5.1 Procurement integrity as readiness requirement. R3+ readiness requires procurement discipline proportionate to scale and risk, including: competitive principles, conflict disclosures, documentation, and audit trails.
6.5.2 Vendor and partner integrity screening. Where feasible and lawful, readiness documentation shall include integrity screening for vendors/partners, including red flags for sanctions risk, beneficial ownership opacity, coercive practices, and reputational laundering.
6.5.3 No donor-directed procurement. Donors may not dictate procurement outcomes. Any attempt to steer vendor selection constitutes an integrity breach subject to Part XI.
6.5.4 Bid-challenge pathway. Where procurement is used, an appropriate bid-challenge or review pathway shall exist, scaled to context, to reduce capture risk and improve fairness.
6.6 Monitoring, evaluation, and learning; anti-vanity metrics; failure as data
6.6.1 MEL mandate. For R3+ initiatives, monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) is mandatory, including: KPIs, baselines, cadence, and feedback loops.
6.6.2 Measured outcomes over narrative claims. Readiness artifacts shall separate: (a) verified outcomes; (b) intermediate outputs; and (c) aspirational claims. Overstatement is treated as a misrepresentation risk.
6.6.3 Good-faith failure reporting. Good-faith reporting of underperformance, harm signals, or delivery failures is protected and treated as institutional strength. Retaliation for such reporting is prohibited and sanctionable.
6.6.4 Learning-to-standards loop. Lessons learned shall feed back into Standards, DPGs, and readiness templates through versioned updates and peer review.
6.7 Readiness scoring; maturity assessments; peer review integration
6.7.1 Readiness scoring. IDCDC may maintain a readiness scoring framework to assess documentation completeness, safeguards posture, auditability, and implementation readiness. Scores must be explainable, non-punitive by design, and not used as political ranking.
6.7.2 Maturity assessments. Chapters and Colleges may be assessed for maturity in readiness practice (record discipline, safeguards, procurement integrity, MEL, protected participation). Results shall be handled in accordance with Part X and published only where safe and appropriate.
6.7.3 Peer review linkage. Readiness artifacts at R3+ may be subject to peer review under Part V.4, with follow-up tracking mandatory.
6.8 Portfolio registry; disclosure tiers; controlled diligence channels
6.8.1 Registry of readiness. IDCDC may maintain a registry of portfolios and readiness status. The registry shall use disclosure tiers aligned to handling classes: Public, Controlled, Restricted.
6.8.2 Public listing is optional. Public listing shall require safety clearance. Where public exposure creates risk, portfolios shall remain Controlled or Restricted.
6.8.3 Controlled diligence channels. IDCDC may support controlled diligence channels for lawful partners (e.g., secure data rooms, limited-access briefings) without creating financial promotion, solicitation, or implied fiduciary duties.
6.8.4 Non-endorsement rule. Registry inclusion indicates readiness status only and does not constitute endorsement of any executor, funder, vendor, or political actor.
6.9 Emergency posture; continuity under disruption; crisis discipline
6.9.1 Continuity requirement. Readiness artifacts must include continuity posture appropriate to risk: operational continuity, cyber incident response alignment, and leadership succession assumptions.
6.9.2 Crisis discipline. In periods of crisis, IDCDC may accelerate internal processes only if: (a) safeguards and handling compliance remain satisfied; (b) documentation remains versioned; and (c) stop-the-line authority remains fully operative.
6.9.3 No emergency override of invariants. Crisis does not permit overriding constitutional invariants: independence, non-partisanship, non-execution, protected participation, and method integrity.
PART VII — ORGANS
7.1 Constitutional architecture; separation of powers; anti-capture design
7.1.1 Organs. IDCDC shall operate through the following organs, each with defined authority, records discipline, and independence safeguards:
(a) the Governing Board (fiduciary organ);
(b) the Assembly of Chapters and Colleges (deliberative organ);
(c) the Council (executive coordination organ);
(d) the Secretariat (professional administration);
(e) the Independent Integrity Offices (mandatory integrity organs); and
(f) the Method & Statistics Council (method independence organ).
7.1.2 Separation of powers. Authority is divided so that:
(a) fiduciary control and institutional safeguards are not subordinated to operational convenience;
(b) publication and method integrity are insulated from donor pressure, factional influence, and reputational bargaining; and
(c) protected participation, handling discipline, and safety controls are enforceable against every organ without exception.
7.1.3 Anti-capture constitution (structural rule). IDCDC shall be constituted so that no government, party/faction, corporation, donor bloc, religious authority, or commonly controlled group can reasonably be understood to control IDCDC’s agenda, staffing, publication posture, credentialing, procurement, or allocations. Capture prevention is an affirmative design duty, not a reactive response.
7.1.4 Method over personality. Institutional legitimacy derives from standards, records, peer review, reproducibility, correction discipline, and independent oversight. Charismatic leadership, ideological alignment, or factional endorsement confers no authority within IDCDC.
7.2 Governing Board (fiduciary organ): mandate; powers; duties
7.2.1 Supreme fiduciary authority. The Governing Board is the supreme fiduciary organ. It holds ultimate responsibility for independence, integrity, financial stewardship, continuity, and legal compliance.
7.2.2 Core powers. The Board shall, at minimum:
(a) adopt and enforce donor caps, conflict rules, and handling policies;
(b) approve budgets, audited accounts, and internal control frameworks;
(c) appoint, evaluate, and remove the Secretary-General and heads of integrity offices, subject to due process;
(d) recognize, suspend, and de-recognize Chapters and Colleges;
(e) approve major Standards, flagship reports, credential frameworks, and public posture;
(f) adopt the annual Work Program and performance scorecards;
(g) authorize sanctions Level 3+ and approve public corrections where safe; and
(h) protect the constitutional invariants, including non-partisanship and non-execution.
7.2.3 Duty of independence. The Board has a non-delegable duty to refuse funding, partnerships, or institutional arrangements that create capture risk, misrepresentation, or reputational laundering—irrespective of financial benefit.
7.2.4 Duty of safety. The Board shall ensure protected participation and handling compliance are resourced, enforced, and continuously improved, recognizing that diaspora conditions involve intimidation risk, infiltration attempts, and coercive pressure.
7.2.5 Duty of corrigibility. The Board shall ensure that correction and supersession are routine disciplines: visible where safe, recorded always, and never suppressed to protect reputations.
7.3 Board composition; eligibility; incompatibilities; renewal discipline
7.3.1 Competence and legitimacy. The Board shall be constituted to reflect competence diversity and intergenerational continuity, and to prevent identity or factional monopolies. Composition shall be balanced across: professional competence; geographic distribution; gender and generational representation; and the diaspora’s plural communities—without treating any identity as a proxy for competence.
7.3.2 No external instruction (hard rule). No Board member may serve as an agent, representative, or instructed proxy of any government, party/faction, corporate control group, donor bloc, or religious institution as a condition of service. Any attempt to bind Board votes to external instruction is prohibited.
7.3.3 Incompatibilities. A person is ineligible to serve (or must be recused or removed) where they:
(a) are a current officer of a political party or campaign apparatus;
(b) are materially funded or directed by a government or intelligence-linked entity;
(c) hold an executive role in a vendor or entity seeking material benefit from IDCDC procurement, credentialing, or Standards;
(d) are a major donor exceeding thresholds defined under Part IX (unless explicitly permitted under strict recusal and cap rules); or
(e) have unmanaged conflicts that compromise independence or method integrity.
7.3.4 Term and renewal. The Board shall adopt term limits and renewal rules designed to:
(a) prevent entrenchment;
(b) ensure leadership rotation; and
(c) preserve institutional memory through staggered transitions, mentorship, and documented handovers.
7.3.5 Board performance discipline. The Board shall maintain a performance framework with measurable indicators, including independence posture, integrity performance, quality of Standards, peer review follow-through, protected participation effectiveness, and diaspora trust metrics.
7.4 Assembly of Chapters and Colleges (deliberative organ): purpose; powers; limits
7.4.1 Purpose. The Assembly convenes recognized Chapters and Colleges to shape the Work Program, surface risks, propose Standards, request peer review priorities, and maintain the federation’s legitimacy through structured deliberation.
7.4.2 Deliberative authority; no fiduciary override. The Assembly does not replace fiduciary authority and may not instruct the Board to breach constitutional invariants, non-execution boundaries, or handling rules.
7.4.3 Hearing and response powers. The Assembly may:
(a) request hearings from the Secretariat and integrity offices;
(b) require written responses to material concerns;
(c) propose amendments and Designated Matters for consideration; and
(d) recommend recognition or de-recognition actions, subject to Board authority and due process.
7.4.4 Subsidiarity guardrail. The Assembly shall protect subsidiarity by ensuring local Chapters retain lawful autonomy in local programming—while enforcing shared method, integrity, and independence minima.
7.5 Council (executive coordination organ): mandate; cadence; escalation
7.5.1 Mandate. The Council supervises execution between Assembly sessions. It coordinates cross-Chapter and cross-College work, tracks delivery against the Work Program, ensures KPI reporting, and escalates integrity, safety, and performance risks to the Board.
7.5.2 No method override. The Council may not alter Standards, indicators, or peer review findings except through documented processes governed by the Method & Statistics Council and the correction/supersession discipline.
7.5.3 Escalation duty. The Council must escalate to integrity offices and the Board any credible signal of: capture attempts; donor interference; misrepresentation; retaliation; data misuse; safety compromise; or method manipulation.
7.5.4 Operational tempo. The Council shall maintain a predictable cadence of reporting and review, including: quarterly performance reviews, risk registers, and progress against peer review follow-up commitments.
7.6 Secretariat (professional administration): functions; professional standards; continuity
7.6.1 Role. The Secretariat is the professional administration responsible for execution of mandates, program support, records discipline, secure operations, and institutional continuity.
7.6.2 Core functions. The Secretariat shall:
(a) administer the Standards lifecycle (drafting, consultation, issuance, versioning);
(b) operate indicators and reporting functions;
(c) administer peer reviews and follow-up tracking;
(d) support Chapters and Colleges with templates, training, and operational toolkits;
(e) maintain document registries, revision IDs, and supersession logs;
(f) operate secure systems, access controls, and handling compliance; and
(g) maintain continuity procedures, including succession plans and crisis protocols.
7.6.3 Professional neutrality. Secretariat staff serve the Charter and institutional method, not factions, donors, or ideological programs. Professional neutrality is compatible with outcome commitments to dignity, equal citizenship, and human rights; it prohibits partisan mobilization.
7.6.4 Competence requirements. The Secretariat shall maintain minimum competence standards for roles affecting safety, handling, indicators, peer review administration, and publication integrity, including training, periodic refresh, and documented checklists.
7.7 Independent Integrity Offices (mandatory): autonomy; powers; protected reporting lines
7.7.1 Establishment. IDCDC shall maintain independent integrity offices with functional autonomy, protected reporting lines, and enforceable authority within remit, as follows:
(a) Ethics & Conflict-of-Interest Office (ECOI);
(b) Audit & Donor Integrity Office (ADI);
(c) Safeguards & Ombudsperson Office (SOO); and
(d) Credentials & Participation Office (CPO).
7.7.2 Functional independence. Integrity offices shall not be operationally subordinated to the Secretariat or donor interests. Their budgets, staffing, and access to records shall be protected by Board-approved safeguards.
7.7.3 Binding compliance directions. Within remit, integrity offices may issue binding directions, including: recusals, participation restrictions, funding quarantine recommendations, publication pauses for safety review, and required corrective action plans—subject to due process clocks and appeal pathways.
7.7.4 Direct access to the Board. Heads of integrity offices shall have direct reporting access to the Board, including the ability to submit protected reports without prior clearance by operational leadership.
7.7.5 Anti-retaliation. Retaliation against any integrity office staff, whistleblower, or complainant is prohibited and constitutes sanctionable misconduct.
7.8 Ethics & Conflict-of-Interest Office (ECOI): duties; recusals; influence hygiene
7.8.1 Mandate. ECOI shall maintain the conflict regime, enforce disclosures, investigate misconduct, and protect institutional independence through influence hygiene.
7.8.2 Conflict disclosure and monitoring. ECOI shall require initial and periodic disclosures for Board members, senior staff, peer review leads, Standards authors, and credential holders, including relationships that constitute Material Influence.
7.8.3 Recusal and restriction powers. ECOI may:
(a) impose recusals from decisions, publications, procurement, or credentialing;
(b) restrict participation in sensitive initiatives;
(c) require divestment from roles that create unmanaged conflicts; and
(d) recommend suspension or de-credentialing where concealment or breach occurs.
7.8.4 Influence caps and meeting discipline. ECOI shall implement meeting protocols and influence caps to reduce bloc control, including anti-capture safeguards in nominations, voting, and agenda-setting.
7.9 Audit & Donor Integrity Office (ADI): donor caps; screening; quarantine; audit posture
7.9.1 Mandate. ADI safeguards financial integrity and independence by enforcing donor concentration limits, screening funding sources, and preventing reputational laundering.
7.9.2 Beneficial control screening. ADI shall apply beneficial-control and integrity screening proportionate to risk, including sanctions-risk considerations, opacity red flags, and capture-risk signals.
7.9.3 Funding quarantine and refusal. ADI may recommend or require: refusal, quarantine, conditional acceptance, or return of funds where funding threatens independence, violates Charter principles, or creates credible safety/legal risk.
7.9.4 Audit readiness. ADI shall maintain audit trails, internal control checks, and audit coordination. Publication of financial reporting shall be safety-aware but not secrecy-driven.
7.10 Safeguards & Ombudsperson Office (SOO): do-no-harm; grievance; stop-the-line
7.10.1 Mandate. SOO protects individuals and communities through safeguards discipline, grievance handling, remedy pathways, and stop-the-line authority where credible harm risk exists.
7.10.2 Grievance and remedy architecture. SOO shall maintain channels that are accessible, confidential where needed, and trauma-informed. Remedy processes shall be time-bound, recorded, and protected from retaliation.
7.10.3 Stop-the-line authority. SOO may impose temporary protective measures—pause publication, suspend participation, restrict access, or quarantine activities—where credible harm, safety compromise, or doxxing risk exists, subject to rapid review, time limits, and appeal clocks.
7.10.4 Safeguards integration. SOO shall ensure readiness work and publications incorporate safeguards minima (Part VI.4) and that violations trigger corrective action.
7.11 Credentials & Participation Office (CPO): membership gates; credential discipline; safety-aware inclusion
7.11.1 Mandate. CPO administers admission, credentialing, participation pathways, and Chapter/College recognition processes in coordination with integrity offices.
7.11.2 Credential standards. CPO shall maintain competence criteria, renewal rules, and revocation/suspension pathways for credentials, including Fellows, peer reviewers, and training roles.
7.11.3 Safety-aware inclusion. CPO shall operationalize inclusion without erasure by maintaining multilingual access, intergenerational pathways, and protected participation options—while enforcing integrity and competence gates to prevent capture and manipulation.
7.11.4 Recognition discipline. CPO shall administer Chapter and College recognition criteria, renewal reviews, and compliance attestations, escalating breaches to the Board and relevant integrity offices.
7.12 Method & Statistics Council (publication independence): scope; authority; non-interference
7.12.1 Mandate. The Method & Statistics Council protects the integrity, reproducibility, and correction discipline of Standards, indicators, peer review protocols, and major analytical outputs.
7.12.2 Non-interference rule (hard rule). Methods, definitions, and statistical treatments may not be altered due to donor pressure, factional demands, reputational convenience, or political messaging needs. Any proposed change must pass documented method review and be recorded in revision history.
7.12.3 Integrity notices. The Council may issue binding integrity notices requiring:
(a) pause of publication pending method verification;
(b) re-analysis or replication;
(c) explicit limitation statements;
(d) correction and supersession actions; or
(e) withdrawal with a recorded rationale where safety or integrity cannot be assured.
7.12.4 Transparency posture. The Council shall maximize methodological transparency consistent with handling rules, including publishing assumptions, limitations, and reproducibility notes where safe.
7.12.5 Appeal and resolution. Disputes about method shall be adjudicated under documented procedures, time-bound, recorded, and immune from “informal negotiation” with donors or factions.
7.13 Role separation; incompatibilities; controlled overlaps
7.13.1 Separation principle. No person shall hold roles that compromise independence, handling compliance, or method integrity. Where overlaps are unavoidable, they must be formally declared, strictly limited, and controlled by recusals and supervision.
7.13.2 Key incompatibilities. The following overlaps are prohibited absent a Designated Matter exception with integrity concurrence:
(a) head of an integrity office simultaneously leading operational delivery;
(b) peer review lead simultaneously serving as the operational owner of the reviewed initiative;
(c) procurement decision-maker simultaneously holding a beneficial interest in a bidding vendor;
(d) senior publication authority simultaneously acting as spokesperson for a donor or faction.
7.13.3 Recusal enforcement. Recusal decisions are enforceable and recorded. Breach of recusal is treated as misconduct and may trigger sanctions.
7.14 Records discipline; organ minutes; role-based attribution
7.14.1 Minutes and decisions. Each organ shall maintain minutes, decision records, and action logs consistent with handling classes. Records shall be sufficient to establish who decided what, when, and under what authority.
7.14.2 Role-based attribution where needed. Where safety requires, attribution may be role-based rather than identity-based in outward-facing records, provided internal audit trails preserve identity access under Restricted handling and two-person access rules.
7.14.3 No “off-the-record governance.” Material governance decisions may not be made through informal channels without record entry. Side agreements, donor-directed decisions, or factional arrangements outside the record are prohibited and sanctionable.
PART VIII — DECISION-MAKING
8.1 Decision legitimacy; anti-paralysis; minimum record standard
8.1.1 Legitimacy by record. No decision of institutional consequence shall have effect within IDCDC unless recorded in an appropriate decision record, assigned a decision identifier, and stored under the applicable handling class.
8.1.2 Anti-paralysis rule. Decision rules shall be designed to prevent deadlock while maintaining legitimacy, including: quorum minima, time-bound agenda windows, escalation pathways, and continuity procedures for disruption scenarios.
8.1.3 Minimum record standard. Each decision record shall state: (a) the deciding organ; (b) authority basis; (c) matters considered; (d) material evidence relied upon or referenced; (e) conflicts disclosed and recusals applied; (f) vote outcome or consensus method; (g) effective date; and (h) any publication posture.
8.1.4 No “shadow governance.” Informal agreements, donor side letters, factional “understandings,” or coercive arrangements outside the records system are prohibited and sanctionable.
8.2 Quorum; voting; consent; remote and protected modalities
8.2.1 Quorum discipline. Each organ shall adopt quorum rules appropriate to risk and authority. Quorum shall not be satisfied by members under unaddressed conflicts where the conflict materially affects the matter at hand.
8.2.2 Voting methods. Voting may occur in person, by secure remote means, or by written resolution, subject to authentication, audit trails, and handling compliance.
8.2.3 Protected participation accommodation. Where safety requires, organs may allow protected participation modalities (including role-based attribution externally), provided internal records preserve auditable identity mapping under Restricted handling and two-person access rules.
8.2.4 Consent and abstention. Abstentions shall be recorded. Conflicted members required to recuse shall not be counted toward quorum for the relevant matter.
8.3 Designated Matters; enhanced safeguard; double-concurrence requirement
8.3.1 Designated Matters (protected class). “Designated Matters” are matters that materially affect independence, safety, method authority, institutional legitimacy, or legal/financial exposure, and therefore require enhanced safeguards.
8.3.2 Double concurrence (hard safeguard). Adoption of any Designated Matter requires:
(a) Board supermajority approval; and
(b) Assembly concurrence by separate majorities of:
(i) recognized Chapters, and
(ii) recognized Colleges.
This safeguard ensures both community legitimacy and technical integrity, and prevents capture by either purely political blocs or purely technical enclaves.
8.3.3 Non-waivability. Double concurrence may not be waived by urgency, donor pressure, reputational concern, or executive convenience, except as expressly provided in 8.6 (Emergency Protocol), and only to the extent required to prevent imminent harm.
8.3.4 Integrity concurrence overlay. For Designated Matters, the Board shall obtain written integrity opinions from ECOI, ADI, and SOO, and a method integrity note from the Method & Statistics Council where method or publication posture is implicated.
8.4 Enumerated Designated Matters (minimum list)
8.4.1 Constitutional and governance changes.
(a) amendment of this Charter;
(b) modification of constitutional invariants;
(c) changes to the organ architecture, integrity office mandates, or method independence safeguards;
(d) creation, merger, or dissolution of Colleges where method authority or public posture is materially affected.
8.4.2 Independence and finance posture.
(a) donor cap thresholds or changes to concentration methodology;
(b) acceptance of any restricted funding arrangement that materially affects independence risk;
(c) adoption of annual budget and acceptance of audited accounts;
(d) adoption of procurement frameworks and high-value procurement decisions above thresholds set under Part IX.
8.4.3 Appointments and removals.
(a) appointment or removal of the Secretary-General;
(b) appointment or removal of heads of integrity offices;
(c) appointment or removal of the Chair of the Method & Statistics Council;
(d) any disciplinary action against such officers for cause.
8.4.4 Method authority and public posture.
(a) issuance of major Standards;
(b) issuance of flagship reports and high-impact public statements;
(c) adoption of credential regimes, badge systems, or verification marks with reputational consequences;
(d) any material shift in publication policy or handling framework.
8.4.5 Sanctions and enforcement.
(a) sanctions at Level 3+ under Part XI;
(b) de-recognition of a Chapter or College;
(c) public correction notices naming external entities, where safe and lawful.
8.4.6 Execution-vehicle triggers.
(a) any action under Part XIII relating to sponsoring, incubating, endorsing, or structurally enabling a separate execution vehicle;
(b) any determination that the “Iran Readiness Window” conditions have materially shifted in a manner requiring institutional repositioning.
8.5 Due process discipline; fairness clocks; evidence posture
8.5.1 Notice and reasons. Any adverse action affecting a person, Chapter, College, or member (including suspension, de-credentialing, funding quarantine, de-recognition, or public correction) requires written notice stating reasons and the authority basis.
8.5.2 Evidence disclosure. IDCDC shall disclose supporting evidence to the maximum extent compatible with safety, law, and source protection. Where disclosure would create credible risk, IDCDC shall provide: (a) a redacted summary; (b) a statement of the non-disclosure basis; and (c) a preserved internal record under Restricted handling.
8.5.3 Right to respond. The affected party shall have a defined window to respond in writing, submit evidence, and request a hearing where appropriate.
8.5.4 Impartial decision-maker. Appeal and review bodies must be conflict-screened and independent of the initiating decision where feasible.
8.5.5 Time-bound “fairness clocks.” IDCDC shall adopt fixed timelines for: notice, response, decision, and appeal. Extensions may be granted only for safety, legal necessity, or material evidence development, and must be recorded with reasons.
8.6 Emergency Protocol; continuity under disruption; bounded authority
8.6.1 Emergency scope. An emergency exists where there is credible imminent risk of: physical harm, doxxing, coercion, cyber compromise, unlawful exposure of sensitive data, or immediate institutional capture.
8.6.2 Emergency powers (bounded). In an emergency, SOO (and where applicable ADI/ECOI) may impose temporary protective measures consistent with stop-the-line authority, including: pausing publication, restricting access, suspending a convening, quarantining systems, or temporarily suspending participation rights.
8.6.3 Time limits and rapid review. Emergency measures must:
(a) be time-limited;
(b) be reviewed rapidly by the Board (or a Board-designated emergency committee) within a defined clock; and
(c) be renewed only upon recorded justification and continued risk assessment.
8.6.4 No emergency politics. Emergency powers may not be used to settle political disputes, suppress criticism, manipulate governance outcomes, or bypass Designated Matters beyond what is necessary to prevent imminent harm.
8.6.5 Continuity posture. IDCDC shall maintain minimum viable governance procedures that allow lawful continuity through disruption, including secure remote voting, redundant records custody, and delegated continuity roles under Restricted handling.
8.7 Records, registers, and publication posture of decisions
8.7.1 Decision registry. IDCDC shall maintain a decision registry of institutional decisions, with public-safe excerpts where possible and safety-cleared redactions where necessary.
8.7.2 Meeting minutes. Minutes shall be recorded for each meeting of each organ, stored under proper handling class, and preserved with revision identifiers. Minutes shall record conflicts and recusals as a mandatory field.
8.7.3 Vote transparency. Where safety permits, vote outcomes shall be published in aggregate form. Where safety requires, attribution shall be role-based externally while maintaining internal audit trails.
8.7.4 Supersession and correction of decisions. If a decision is later corrected or superseded, the correction must:
(a) cite the original decision identifier;
(b) state reasons;
(c) define scope; and
(d) state the new effective date.
Supersession does not delete the record; it preserves institutional memory and accountability.
8.8 Whistleblowing protections; anti-retaliation; protected reporting
8.8.1 Protected reporting channels. IDCDC shall maintain secure channels for reporting misconduct, capture attempts, intimidation, data misuse, retaliation, or safety breaches.
8.8.2 Anti-retaliation (hard rule). Retaliation against whistleblowers, complainants, sources, or integrity office personnel is prohibited and sanctionable at Level 3+.
8.8.3 Confidentiality discipline. The identity of whistleblowers and sources shall be protected under Restricted handling unless disclosure is legally required, safety-cleared, and strictly minimized.
8.8.4 Duty to act. Credible reports trigger mandatory triage, recorded intake, and time-bound disposition, including corrective action plans or escalation to sanctions where warranted.
PART IX — FINANCE
9.1 Financial purpose; fiduciary duty; ring-fencing
9.1.1 Public-interest finance. IDCDC’s finances exist to sustain independence, continuity, and public-interest delivery of standards, indicators, peer review, and readiness—never to create private benefit, political leverage, or donor control.
9.1.2 Fiduciary duty. All officers and organs with budget authority owe a fiduciary duty to IDCDC’s purposes and constitutional invariants, including independence, non-partisanship, protected participation, method integrity, and non-execution perimeter.
9.1.3 Ring-fencing. Where funds are designated for specific purposes (e.g., training, digital public goods, peer review support), IDCDC shall ring-fence such funds in accounting and reporting so they cannot be repurposed by convenience, pressure, or capture.
9.1.4 No off-book arrangements. Side payments, parallel accounts, informal “sponsor favors,” barter arrangements that distort reporting, and undisclosed benefits in kind are prohibited and sanctionable.
9.2 Budgeting; approvals; reporting cadence
9.2.1 Annual budget. IDCDC shall adopt an annual operating budget prior to the fiscal year, including: (a) forecasted revenue by category; (b) operating expenditures; (c) reserves policy; (d) restricted funds posture; (e) cybersecurity and safety allocations; and (f) contingency and continuity provisions.
9.2.2 Approval authority. Adoption of the annual budget and acceptance of audited accounts are Designated Matters under Part VIII and require enhanced safeguards.
9.2.3 In-year controls. Material budget variances, re-allocations above a Board-set threshold, and unplanned commitments that create reputational or capture risk require escalation and documented approval.
9.2.4 Reporting cadence. IDCDC shall produce:
(a) quarterly management accounts and risk notes to the Board;
(b) periodic transparency updates to members, subject to handling rules; and
(c) annual financial statements and narrative stewardship reporting.
9.3 Independence economics; revenue posture; prohibited funding structures
9.3.1 Independence by design. IDCDC shall prefer diversified, small-donor and membership-based revenue over reliance on any single benefactor, donor bloc, or sponsor category.
9.3.2 No pay-to-influence. Donations may not purchase governance rights, publication outcomes, credential issuance, procurement preference, staffing decisions, or agenda control.
9.3.3 No political funding. IDCDC shall not accept funding that is conditioned on partisan messaging, electoral activity, factional advantage, or political mobilization, whether direct or indirect.
9.3.4 No covert sponsorship. Funding through intermediaries that obscures beneficial control, sanctions exposure, or influence intent is prohibited unless fully clarified and integrity-cleared.
9.4 Donor concentration limits; common control; cap mechanics
9.4.1 Cap rule (anti-capture). No single donor or commonly controlled donor group may exceed a capped share of annual operating revenue, including cash and in-kind contributions valued under 9.6.
9.4.2 Common control definition. “Commonly controlled donor group” includes donors linked by: beneficial ownership; shared decision control; coordinated giving under a single strategist; or any arrangement reasonably designed to evade caps.
9.4.3 Default cap and changes. The default cap shall be set by the Board on recommendation of ADI, published in policy form where safe, and may be raised only as a Designated Matter with written integrity concurrence.
9.4.4 Look-back aggregation. IDCDC shall aggregate donor contributions over a Board-defined look-back period to prevent cap gaming through timing.
9.4.5 Concentration triggers. Approaching cap thresholds triggers: enhanced screening, funding quarantine options, and mandatory Board notification with risk analysis.
9.5 Beneficial-control screening; sanctions posture; funding quarantine
9.5.1 Screening obligation. ADI shall screen significant contributions for: beneficial ownership/control; sanctions and export-control risk; corruption indicators; reputational laundering risk; coercion risk; and conflicts with constitutional invariants.
9.5.2 Quarantine authority. ADI may: refuse, delay, condition, or quarantine funding pending clearance. Quarantine decisions shall be recorded with reasons under appropriate handling class.
9.5.3 Conditional acceptance. Where funding is accepted with conditions, conditions may include: disclosure requirements; capped influence; restricted use; enhanced audit rights; communications constraints; and mandatory non-endorsement language.
9.5.4 Return and unwind. Where a contribution is later discovered to be incompatible with this Charter (e.g., concealed beneficial control), IDCDC may unwind, return, or re-route funds to lawful public-interest purposes, subject to law and recorded rationale.
9.6 In-kind valuation; fair value; anti-gaming discipline
9.6.1 Valuation rules. IDCDC shall adopt documented valuation rules for in-kind contributions, including: labor, pro bono services, software, cloud credits, facilities, equipment, and sponsorship benefits.
9.6.2 Fair value discipline. In-kind contributions shall be valued at fair market value or a documented conservative method, not inflated for reputational gain or donor cap evasion.
9.6.3 Independence check. In-kind contributions that create operational dependency (e.g., core infrastructure donated by a single provider) require additional risk review and may be capped or declined.
9.6.4 Disclosure posture. Significant in-kind contributions shall be disclosed in stewardship reporting to the extent safe and lawful.
9.7 Restricted funding; program constraints; non-interference covenants
9.7.1 Permitted restricted funding. Program-restricted funding is permitted only where it: (a) serves public benefit; (b) is auditably ring-fenced; (c) includes no method or publication interference; and (d) passes integrity screening.
9.7.2 Non-interference covenant (mandatory). All restricted funding instruments shall include a covenant that the donor:
(a) cannot alter standards, indicators, peer review outcomes, or publication posture;
(b) cannot influence credentials, procurement, staffing, or sanctions;
(c) cannot veto corrections or compel retractions; and
(d) accepts IDCDC’s right to refuse, correct, and publish within safety constraints.
9.7.3 No donor veto. Donors shall not receive advance approval rights over outputs, except for narrow accuracy checks on donor-provided factual inputs that are clearly labeled as such and do not affect method conclusions.
9.8 Procurement; vendor integrity; competition posture
9.8.1 Procurement principles. Procurement shall be competitive, documented, and conflict-controlled, proportionate to value and risk. Sole-source procurement requires recorded justification.
9.8.2 Vendor integrity screening. Vendors may be screened for: sanctions exposure; beneficial control; conflicts; cyber risk; and reputational laundering risk, proportionate to the contract.
9.8.3 No donor steering. Donor influence over procurement decisions is prohibited. Any evidence of donor steering constitutes an integrity breach.
9.8.4 Bid-challenge pathway. IDCDC shall maintain a channel for procurement complaints and bid challenges, with triage and recorded disposition under appropriate handling.
9.9 Internal controls; segregation of duties; treasury safeguards
9.9.1 Segregation of duties. IDCDC shall maintain segregation of duties for payments, approvals, reconciliation, and reporting, including multi-signatory controls for disbursements above thresholds.
9.9.2 Access controls. Financial systems access shall follow least privilege, with role-based permissions, MFA, and periodic access review.
9.9.3 Records retention. Financial records shall be retained for legally required periods and stored under appropriate handling classes, with secure backups and continuity procedures.
9.9.4 Fraud controls. IDCDC shall maintain fraud prevention controls, whistleblowing channels, and incident response procedures aligned with Part X and Part VIII.
9.10 Audit; assurance; transparency with safety
9.10.1 Independent audit. IDCDC shall obtain independent audit or review appropriate to jurisdiction and scale, and shall not select auditors under donor influence.
9.10.2 Audit scope. Audit scope shall include: revenue integrity; donor caps compliance; restricted fund ring-fencing; procurement sampling; and internal control effectiveness.
9.10.3 Publication posture. Audited statements shall be published where lawful and safe. Where publication creates credible safety risk, IDCDC shall publish redacted summaries while preserving full internal audit trails under Restricted handling.
9.10.4 Management letters. Material audit findings require management response, corrective action plans, and follow-up tracking with Board oversight.
9.11 Conflicts; gifts; hospitality; travel; benefits
9.11.1 Disclosure rule. Officers, members in Material Influence positions, and peer review leads shall disclose gifts, hospitality, sponsored travel, and benefits above a policy threshold.
9.11.2 Prohibited benefits. Benefits that create appearance of influence, quid pro quo, or coercion are prohibited, regardless of value.
9.11.3 Recusal and restriction. Where benefits create a conflict risk, ECOI may require recusal, role restriction, or removal from sensitive matters.
9.12 Financial integrity as a constitutional asset
9.12.1 Non-negotiable. Financial integrity is a core safeguard against capture and a condition of legitimacy.
9.12.2 Sanctionable breaches. Material breaches—cap evasion, concealed beneficial control, off-book funding, donor steering, procurement fraud, or retaliatory funding threats—trigger sanctions under Part XI, including Level 3+ where warranted.
PART X — DATA GOVERNANCE
10.1 Purpose; safety-first transparency; least-disclosure doctrine
10.1.1 Purpose. IDCDC’s information governance exists to protect human safety, preserve method integrity, enable lawful accountability, and sustain institutional continuity across jurisdictions and generations.
10.1.2 Safety-first transparency. IDCDC shall publish methods and outcomes to the maximum extent compatible with safety, law, and source protection. Where disclosure creates credible risk, IDCDC shall publish redacted summaries while preserving full internal audit trails and revision history under Restricted handling.
10.1.3 Least-disclosure doctrine. IDCDC shall apply least disclosure: collect less, store less, share less, retain less—while maintaining sufficient record discipline for governance, reproducibility, correction, and audit.
10.1.4 No harm by design. Where an information practice could foreseeably enable intimidation, doxxing, infiltration, or coercion, the default is restraint, aggregation, and role-based attribution—without sacrificing internal accountability.
10.2 Handling Classes; classification; access rules
10.2.1 Handling Classes. IDCDC shall classify information at minimum as:
(a) Public — safely publishable; low risk; broadly distributable.
(b) Controlled — limited circulation; identity exposure, reputational, or operational risk; shared on a need-to-know basis.
(c) Restricted — high-risk; includes sensitive identities, source materials, security posture, internal investigations, and unredacted evidence logs; shared only with approved roles under two-person rule where applicable.
10.2.2 Classification duty. All organs, Chapters, Colleges, and staff shall classify information at creation and review classification before distribution, publication, or external sharing.
10.2.3 Default classification. Where uncertainty exists, the default shall be Controlled, escalating to Restricted for identity-bearing content, safety-sensitive locations, or investigative materials.
10.2.4 Access by role. Access is granted by role, not status. Membership does not imply access. Roles requiring Restricted access shall be screened, trained, and periodically re-authorized.
10.2.5 Two-person rule. For Restricted identity maps, source-protection records, and integrity investigations, IDCDC shall apply a two-person rule: no single person may access, export, or disclose the material unilaterally.
10.3 Identity protection; attribution discipline; anti-doxxing enforcement
10.3.1 Protected participation. IDCDC shall maintain participation modalities that allow contributors to engage without undue exposure to intimidation, infiltration, coercion, or reprisals.
10.3.2 Attribution tiers. IDCDC may use: (a) named attribution; (b) role-based attribution; (c) pseudonymous attribution; and (d) non-attribution, as safety requires. The choice shall be recorded internally with rationale.
10.3.3 Identity separation. Where role-based attribution is used, the mapping from role marker to real identity shall be stored separately under Restricted handling with access-logged controls.
10.3.4 Anti-doxxing. Doxxing, threats, harassment, and identity coercion are prohibited and sanctionable. IDCDC shall maintain takedown and escalation procedures, including stop-the-line authority under Part XI.
10.3.5 Minimal roster posture. Public rosters, attendee lists, and sensitive leadership identities may be withheld or minimized where disclosure creates credible risk, without weakening internal governance audit trails.
10.4 Data minimization; consent; retention; lawful basis
10.4.1 Minimal data collection. IDCDC shall collect only information necessary for membership administration, protected participation, and operational delivery of standards, indicators, peer review, and readiness.
10.4.2 Sensitive data rule. Sensitive personal data shall not be collected unless strictly necessary, explicitly consented, and safety-cleared. When collected, it shall be Restricted by default.
10.4.3 Consent and notice. Where IDCDC collects personal data, it shall provide clear notice of purpose, retention, access rights, and complaint pathways, consistent with host-country law.
10.4.4 Retention limits. IDCDC shall adopt retention schedules by Handling Class. Data and documents shall be retained only as long as needed for lawful obligations, audit, method reproducibility, and correction history.
10.4.5 Secure disposal. Controlled and Restricted materials shall be disposed of using secure deletion methods, with recorded disposition where appropriate.
10.5 Indicators and research data posture; reproducibility without exposure
10.5.1 Aggregation by default. Indicators and dashboards shall prefer aggregated, anonymized, and privacy-preserving methods to avoid individual-level exposure.
10.5.2 Safe proxies. Where direct measurement increases risk, IDCDC shall employ safe proxies with documented limitations and bias risks.
10.5.3 Reproducibility discipline. Where feasible, IDCDC shall publish methods, code, and schemas in a way that supports reproducibility without revealing sensitive inputs. Where full release is unsafe, IDCDC shall maintain internal reproducibility packs under Restricted handling.
10.5.4 No hidden modeling. Modeled estimates must be labeled as modeled, with assumptions, ranges, and sensitivity notes, to prevent the laundering of opinion as fact.
10.6 Secure communications; platform discipline; operational hygiene
10.6.1 Secure channels. IDCDC shall use secure communications appropriate to Handling Class, including end-to-end encryption for Controlled and Restricted workflows where feasible.
10.6.2 Least-privilege collaboration. Shared documents and repositories shall be permissioned with least privilege, access logs, and periodic access reviews.
10.6.3 Device and account hygiene. Roles handling Controlled/Restricted information shall follow baseline security requirements, including MFA, device encryption, and safe update practices.
10.6.4 No unsafe forwarding. Controlled/Restricted information may not be forwarded to personal accounts, public channels, or unapproved platforms.
10.6.5 Meeting hygiene. For sensitive matters, IDCDC shall use neutral meeting titles, minimized metadata, and role-based participation records consistent with Protected Participation.
10.7 Cybersecurity posture; incident logging; breach response
10.7.1 Baseline controls. IDCDC shall maintain: MFA; access control; secure backups; logging; patch management; and role-based permissions.
10.7.2 Threat-aware operations. IDCDC shall assume adversarial conditions: phishing, impersonation, harassment, infiltration, disinformation, and targeted cyber intrusion.
10.7.3 Incident response. IDCDC shall maintain an incident response plan that includes: triage; containment; notification decisions; evidence preservation; recovery; and corrective measures, with handling-class discipline.
10.7.4 Breach disclosure. Where legally required or necessary to prevent harm, IDCDC shall disclose breaches in a safety-aware manner, avoiding exposure of individuals and sources.
10.7.5 Continuity. IDCDC shall maintain continuity planning for identity cell functions, records preservation, and critical systems, including contingency access procedures under two-person rule.
10.8 Source protection; whistleblowing channels; integrity investigations
10.8.1 Source protection. IDCDC shall protect sources and informants to the maximum extent consistent with law and safety. Source identity is Restricted by default.
10.8.2 Whistleblowing channels. IDCDC shall operate protected reporting channels for misconduct, capture attempts, coercion, retaliation, security breaches, and misrepresentation.
10.8.3 Need-to-know investigations. Integrity investigations shall be conducted on a need-to-know basis with strict access controls and evidence logs, with conflict screening for investigators.
10.8.4 Non-retaliation. Retaliation against whistleblowers or participants who raise good-faith concerns is a sanctionable offense.
10.9 Cross-border operations; localization; legal compliance
10.9.1 Host-country compliance. All information practices shall comply with applicable host-country law, including data protection, nonprofit governance rules, sanctions/export controls, and restrictions on political activity.
10.9.2 Localization parameters. Where legal requirements diverge across jurisdictions, IDCDC shall maintain a core minimum posture and localize procedures through documented parameters without weakening constitutional invariants.
10.9.3 Export controls and sanctions. Information sharing that creates sanctions/export-control risk shall be reviewed and, where necessary, restricted or declined.
10.10 Information governance as enforceable safeguard
10.10.1 Binding policies. IDCDC shall maintain binding policies implementing this Part, including classification rules, access controls, retention schedules, and incident response protocols.
10.10.2 Training requirement. Roles with access to Controlled/Restricted information shall complete training on handling, security, and protected participation prior to authorization and at periodic renewal.
10.10.3 Audit and review. IDCDC shall periodically audit compliance with handling rules, access controls, and breach response readiness; material failures require corrective action plans and follow-up tracking.
PART XI — MISREPRESENTATION
11.1 Purpose; integrity as a safety system
11.1.1 Purpose. This Part establishes enforceable rules to prevent misrepresentation, protect the credibility of IDCDC’s standards and outputs, safeguard participants from coercion and reputational laundering, and ensure rapid protective action where credible harm risk exists.
11.1.2 Integrity as infrastructure. Independence and protected participation are not aspirational; they are operational requirements. IDCDC shall maintain enforceable conduct rules, a sanctions ladder, and stop-the-line authority to prevent capture, intimidation, and abuse of the institution’s name, credentials, or processes.
11.1.3 Proportionality and due process. Enforcement shall be proportionate, evidence-based, recorded, appealable, and consistent with Part VIII due-process clocks and Part X handling classes.
11.2 Misrepresentation; name, marks, credentials, and implied endorsement
11.2.1 No implied affiliation. No person or entity may claim, imply, or suggest IDCDC endorsement, credential, representation, certification, partnership, or affiliation except as expressly authorized in writing by an authorized IDCDC officer under recorded delegation.
11.2.2 Name and marks protection. The name “Iranian Diaspora Cooperation & Development Council (IDCDC)”, any abbreviation, emblem, seal, badge, credential, verification mark, or “Diwān” continuity mark issued under this Charter is protected. Unauthorized use constitutes misrepresentation.
11.2.3 Credential misuse. Credentials may not be used to:
(a) imply political legitimacy, diplomatic standing, or public authority;
(b) advertise regulated financial products or services;
(c) solicit funds or investment on the basis of IDCDC standing;
(d) intimidate, silence, or discredit other diaspora participants; or
(e) launder reputation for abusive, coercive, corrupt, or captured practices.
11.2.4 False authority and impersonation. Impersonating an IDCDC officer, reviewer, integrity official, Chapter/College lead, or speaking “on behalf of IDCDC” without authorization is a severe breach and grounds for Level 3+ sanctions.
11.2.5 Mandatory disclaimers. Where IDCDC authorizes reference by a partner or member, the authorization shall include non-endorsement and non-representation language, revocable at any time for breach or risk escalation.
11.2.6 Public correction where safe. IDCDC may issue public correction notices for misrepresentation, subject to safety review and handling constraints. Where public correction increases risk, IDCDC shall employ controlled corrections and internal documentation.
11.3 Code of conduct; dignity, non-harassment, and institutional behavior
11.3.1 Dignity and respect. IDCDC requires respect for dignity across gender, ethnicity, language, faith or none, disability, orientation, and generational status. Dehumanization, hate speech, threats, or harassment are prohibited.
11.3.2 Anti-intimidation rule. Coercion, threats, extortion, blackmail, stalking, intimidation, coordinated harassment, and retaliation—online or offline—are prohibited and subject to rapid protective measures.
11.3.3 No factional domination. Participants may not use IDCDC spaces to impose factional discipline, enforce ideological conformity, or conduct loyalty tests. IDCDC is a cooperation institution; factional capture is an integrity breach.
11.3.4 Constructive critique. Criticism is permitted and protected when evidence-based and non-abusive. Bad-faith defamation campaigns, smear operations, and fabricated allegations are sanctionable.
11.3.5 Safe meetings and antitrust posture. Where relevant, IDCDC shall enforce meeting rules that prevent improper coordination, confidential market behavior, or procurement manipulation. Any suspected breach must be escalated to integrity offices.
11.4 Conflict of interest; gifts; outside roles; recusals
11.4.1 Disclosure duty. Members, Fellows, staff, reviewers, and officers shall disclose material conflicts and Material Influence relationships, including donor ties, paid advisory roles, political roles, and relationships that may affect impartiality.
11.4.2 Recusal and role restrictions. ECOI may impose recusals, role restrictions, or removal from sensitive decisions, peer reviews, procurement, or publication processes.
11.4.3 Gifts and hospitality. Gifts, hospitality, sponsored travel, or benefits that could reasonably influence judgment are prohibited unless expressly permitted under written policy. Where permitted, they must be disclosed and recorded.
11.4.4 No pay-for-influence. Offering or accepting compensation, favors, or promises in exchange for editorial, credentialing, peer review, procurement, or governance outcomes is a severe breach.
11.5 Integrity offices’ enforcement powers; investigations; evidence discipline
11.5.1 Enforcement authority. ECOI, ADI, and SOO may investigate, require disclosures, impose interim measures, and recommend sanctions within their remit, consistent with due process and handling rules.
11.5.2 Evidence logs. Investigations shall maintain evidence logs, conflict screening of investigators, and need-to-know distribution. Sensitive identities and source materials are Restricted by default.
11.5.3 Cooperation duty. Members and officers shall cooperate with integrity investigations subject to safety and legal constraints. Obstruction, retaliation, or destruction of records is a severe breach.
11.5.4 Findings and reasons. Adverse actions must include reasoned findings, citing evidence to the extent safely possible, with redactions where disclosure creates credible risk.
11.6 Sanctions ladder; remedies; proportionality
11.6.1 Sanctions spectrum. IDCDC shall maintain a graduated ladder, applied proportionately:
(a) Level 1 — Notice and corrective plan: written warning; training; corrective actions; monitored follow-up.
(b) Level 2 — Suspension: suspension of participation rights; restricted access; temporary removal from roles; time-bound conditions for reinstatement.
(c) Level 3 — De-credentialing / removal / quarantine: removal from office or review roles; credential revocation; funding quarantine; partner suspension; controlled correction notice.
(d) Level 4 — Permanent exclusion: permanent ban from roles and participation; public correction where safe; referral to legal action where necessary and lawful.
11.6.2 Remedial actions. In addition to sanctions, IDCDC may require:
(a) retractions or corrections;
(b) training and re-certification;
(c) return of misused materials or removal of marks;
(d) cease-and-desist undertakings;
(e) structural safeguards (recusals, firewalling, access reduction);
(f) partner contract termination;
(g) restitution or cost recovery where lawful and appropriate.
11.6.3 Public notice posture. Public notices are safety-cleared. Where public disclosure increases risk, IDCDC shall maintain controlled notices, internal records, and partner notifications as necessary.
11.6.4 Non-retaliation. Retaliation against complainants, witnesses, whistleblowers, or integrity officers is independently sanctionable at Level 3+.
11.7 Stop-the-line authority; urgent protective measures
11.7.1 Trigger. Where credible risk exists of harm to persons, source exposure, doxxing, coercion, infiltration, imminent misrepresentation, or major methodological compromise, SOO may invoke stop-the-line authority.
11.7.2 Permitted measures. Stop-the-line measures may include:
(a) immediate publication hold;
(b) temporary access suspension;
(c) removal of public materials pending review;
(d) restriction of meeting participation;
(e) freezing credential status pending inquiry;
(f) requiring secure channel migration;
(g) immediate partner notice and reference revocation.
11.7.3 Time limits and review. Stop-the-line measures are time-bound and must be reviewed promptly by a designated integrity panel under due-process clocks, with recorded reasons and renewal criteria.
11.7.4 Appeal. Parties affected by stop-the-line measures have a right to appeal under Part VIII, subject to safety and evidence-handling constraints.
11.8 Appeals; fairness; independence of review
11.8.1 Appealable actions. Level 2+ sanctions and material stop-the-line measures are appealable.
11.8.2 Conflict-screened appeal body. Appeals shall be heard by a conflict-screened body independent of the decision-makers and, where feasible, incorporating cross-Chapter and cross-College representation.
11.8.3 Reasoned decisions. Appeal outcomes must be reasoned, recorded, and communicated with appropriate redactions and handling classification.
11.8.4 Finality and correction. Final decisions are entered into IDCDC records. Where a sanction relates to public misrepresentation or major error, the publication registry shall be updated consistent with correction and supersession discipline.
11.9 Protection of the institution; continuity of integrity function
11.9.1 Integrity continuity. IDCDC shall maintain continuity procedures so integrity offices remain operable during disruption, including secure access, delegation chains, and minimum viable operating protocols.
11.9.2 Integrity reporting. IDCDC shall publish—subject to safety—a periodic integrity report describing aggregate enforcement activity, lessons learned, and control improvements, without exposing protected identities.
PART XII — EXTERNAL RELATIONS
12.1 Purpose; cooperation without capture
12.1.1 Purpose. This Part governs how IDCDC cooperates with external institutions while preserving independence, non-partisanship, protected participation, and the non-execution perimeter.
12.1.2 Partnerable by design. IDCDC exists to be credibly usable by lawful partners—universities, municipalities, professional bodies, foundations, development and resilience actors, and responsible private-sector institutions—without becoming their instrument, platform, or endorsement vehicle.
12.1.3 No reputational laundering. External cooperation shall not be used to sanitize, legitimize, or normalize abusive, coercive, corrupt, or captured practices. Integrity gates apply to all partner relationships.
12.2 Permitted cooperation instruments
12.2.1 Non-binding instruments. IDCDC may enter cooperation arrangements including: memoranda of understanding (MoUs), joint workplans, research collaboration agreements, skills and mentorship partnerships, curriculum and training collaborations, and shared standards initiatives, provided they remain within IDCDC’s civilian, technical scope.
12.2.2 Standards and readiness collaboration. IDCDC may collaborate on:
(a) adopting or co-developing technical standards and toolkits;
(b) readiness rail documentation and quality gates;
(c) monitoring and evaluation methods;
(d) safeguards and grievance systems;
(e) digital public goods and educational materials; and
(f) convenings to reduce coordination friction.
12.2.3 Data cooperation discipline. Any information sharing shall follow Part X. IDCDC prefers aggregation, anonymization, and safe proxies. Individual-level exposure is prohibited unless legally required, explicitly consented, and safety-cleared.
12.2.4 No execution by stealth. Cooperation instruments shall not create implied execution roles (custody, disbursement, underwriting, placement, solicitation, promotion), nor confer market-facing authority, nor create implied fiduciary duties.
12.3 Partner eligibility; integrity, capture, and sanctions screening
12.3.1 Integrity screening. Prior to partnership, ADI and ECOI shall apply risk-proportionate screening, which may include: beneficial-control checks, sanctions and export-control posture, governance and conduct review, prior intimidation or infiltration behavior, and conflicts with IDCDC’s constitutional invariants.
12.3.2 High-risk counterparties. Partnerships shall be refused, conditioned, or quarantined where credible evidence indicates:
(a) capture risk, coercive influence, or reputation laundering intent;
(b) requirements to alter methods, suppress findings, or manipulate indicators;
(c) threats to protected participation or source safety;
(d) unacceptable conflict-of-interest structures; or
(e) legal or sanctions exposure inconsistent with host-country law and this Charter.
12.3.3 Periodic re-screening. Partnerships are subject to periodic review and may be suspended or terminated upon material risk change.
12.4 Non-endorsement; brand and reference controls
12.4.1 No implied endorsement. All partner references to IDCDC must include clear non-endorsement and non-representation language, in the form prescribed by the Secretariat and Communications Integrity Lead (or equivalent function), and safety-cleared under Part X.
12.4.2 Use of name and marks. Use of IDCDC name, emblem, badges, credentials, or marks requires written authorization specifying scope, duration, and revocation terms. Unauthorized use triggers Part XI remedies.
12.4.3 Reference registry. IDCDC may maintain an internal registry of partner references, permissions granted, expiration dates, and revocations, classified under Part X.
12.4.4 Revocation. Authorization to reference IDCDC is revocable immediately upon breach, misrepresentation, elevated safety risk, or integrity concerns.
12.5 Communications integrity; public statements; attribution discipline
12.5.1 Scope of public communications. Public statements shall be limited to: method, evidence, standards, readiness posture, program outcomes, safeguards, and institutional integrity. Political campaigning, electoral mobilization, and partisan positioning are prohibited.
12.5.2 Attribution and identity safety. IDCDC may use role-based attribution (e.g., “Methods Council,” “Integrity Office”) where individual attribution increases risk. Identity disclosure must be safety-cleared.
12.5.3 Claims discipline. External communications must avoid:
(a) exaggerated claims of authority or impact;
(b) statements implying statehood, diplomatic status, or governmental representation;
(c) statements implying IDCDC executes finance or operates regulated markets;
(d) “certificate washing” (implying general approval from a narrow credential); or
(e) unverifiable claims lacking evidence posture.
12.5.4 Correction and supersession. Public communications are subject to correction and supersession discipline. Material errors require a correction notice of comparable visibility, subject to safety constraints.
12.6 Partnership conduct; access, confidentiality, and information boundaries
12.6.1 Need-to-know access. Partner access to controlled or restricted materials shall be limited to need-to-know, time-bound, and logged. Distribution beyond authorized recipients is prohibited.
12.6.2 Source and participant protection. IDCDC shall not disclose protected identities to partners absent explicit consent and safety clearance, unless legally compelled; where compelled, disclosure shall be minimized and recorded.
12.6.3 No partner editing of integrity outputs. Partners may not edit IDCDC standards, indicators, peer review findings, or integrity notices in a way that changes meaning. If a partner requires alignment of language, IDCDC may publish partner comments as an appendix-style response or “partner position note” subject to handling rules.
12.6.4 No exclusivity that creates control. Exclusive arrangements that create dependency, suppress plurality, or create capture risk are prohibited unless approved as a Designated Matter with integrity concurrence and an explicit exit plan.
12.7 Dispute posture; termination; survival of safeguards
12.7.1 Dispute handling. Disputes with partners shall be handled through documented escalation pathways, with safety-aware records. IDCDC retains the right to publish methodological corrections and integrity actions regardless of partner preferences.
12.7.2 Termination. IDCDC may terminate partnerships for breach, misrepresentation, elevated safety risk, capture risk, or interference attempts. Termination decisions are recorded and may be disclosed publicly where safe.
12.7.3 Survival. Confidentiality, non-endorsement, mark-use restrictions, and source-protection obligations survive termination.
PART XIII — FUTURE EXECUTION
13.1 Separation doctrine; strict firewall
13.1.1 Principle of separation. Any financing facility, fund platform, escrow mechanism, underwriting entity, market-facing operator, payments or custody service, or other execution vehicle (“Execution Vehicle”) shall be legally separate from IDCDC, independently governed, and regulated as required in its jurisdiction(s).
13.1.2 No implied authority. No Execution Vehicle may present itself as IDCDC, as an organ of IDCDC, or as enjoying implied authorization, legitimacy, or endorsement beyond what is expressly granted in a written, time-bound, revocable cooperation instrument.
13.1.3 No backdoor execution. IDCDC shall not use affiliates, intermediaries, Chapters, Colleges, or partners to indirectly perform activities prohibited by the non-execution boundary, including solicitation, promotion, placement, custody, pooling, routing, or disbursement of third-party funds.
13.1.4 Firewall against capture and liability. Legal separation is mandatory to:
(a) preserve IDCDC’s non-state, non-partisan, technical posture;
(b) prevent capture and reputational laundering;
(c) protect members and participants from coercion and intimidation; and
(d) prevent cross-contamination of regulatory duties, liabilities, and conflicts.
13.2 Permissible relationship to any Execution Vehicle
13.2.1 Permitted roles (readiness only). IDCDC may, within its non-execution perimeter:
(a) publish standards, templates, and readiness documentation methods that an Execution Vehicle may adopt;
(b) conduct peer reviews of readiness and safeguards posture (not of market performance) under Part V;
(c) provide training and capacity building on governance, safeguards, and auditability; and
(d) convene technical dialogues to reduce friction between lawful actors.
13.2.2 No control rights. IDCDC shall not hold control rights over an Execution Vehicle that would compromise independence or create consolidated control, nor accept governance arrangements that make IDCDC responsible for execution outcomes.
13.2.3 No endorsement presumption. Adoption of IDCDC standards by an Execution Vehicle does not constitute endorsement. Any permitted reference shall include explicit non-endorsement language under Part XII.
13.3 The Dormant Iran Readiness Window
13.3.1 Purpose. IDCDC may maintain a dormant “Iran Readiness Window” as a technical preparedness capability—methods, templates, training, and portfolio documentation—designed to minimize improvisation and maximize safeguards if lawful openings emerge.
13.3.2 Preparedness only. The Iran Readiness Window is strictly non-executory. It does not initiate, operate, finance, administer, or manage in-Iran activity, nor does it solicit or route funds, nor does it engage in political operations.
13.3.3 Safety-first posture. All Iran-related readiness artifacts are classified under Part X by default as at least Controlled, and commonly Restricted, unless and until safety-cleared for wider release.
13.3.4 No implied representation. The existence of an Iran Readiness Window shall not be construed as a claim of authority over Iran, nor as governmental representation, nor as a mandate to act. It is a preparedness discipline only.
13.4 Enhanced launch conditions for any Iran-adjacent execution
13.4.1 Lawful openings threshold. No in-Iran execution activity may be undertaken unless:
(a) lawful openings exist in relevant jurisdictions;
(b) counterpart structures are demonstrably compliant and independently governed; and
(c) credible risk assessment indicates that participation does not foreseeably cause harm.
13.4.2 Designated Matter approval. Any IDCDC sponsorship, incubation, formal association, or public support of an Iran-adjacent Execution Vehicle is a Designated Matter and requires:
(a) Board supermajority approval; and
(b) Assembly double-concurrence (Chapters and Colleges), as applicable under Part VIII.
13.4.3 Integrity opinions (mandatory). Prior to any such approval, the following written opinions are required and shall be recorded:
(a) ADI: funding integrity, beneficial control, sanctions posture, and anti-capture assessment;
(b) ECOI: conflict, influence, and ethical compatibility assessment;
(c) SOO: safeguards, do-no-harm, participant risk, and protected participation assessment; and
(d) Method & Statistics Council (where methods/indicators are implicated): methodological integrity and evidence posture assessment.
13.4.4 No acceleration under pressure. No emergency, media cycle, donor pressure, or reputational urgency may compress the above requirements. Speed without safeguards is prohibited.
13.5 Non-transfer of legitimacy; reference discipline
13.5.1 No “halo effect.” IDCDC shall actively prevent the misuse of its name, marks, credentials, or standards as a halo to imply trustworthiness, legality, or approval of execution activities.
13.5.2 Reference controls. Any reference to IDCDC by an Execution Vehicle must:
(a) be authorized in writing;
(b) specify scope and duration;
(c) include non-endorsement and non-representation language;
(d) be revocable; and
(e) be subject to correction notice requirements where misused.
13.5.3 Public correction where safe. Where misrepresentation occurs, IDCDC shall issue a public correction notice to prevent deception, subject to safety constraints and handling rules.
13.6 Record discipline; audit trail of any boundary decision
13.6.1 Boundary decisions are recorded. Decisions concerning any execution boundary, Iran readiness posture, or relationship to an Execution Vehicle shall be recorded with: rationale, risk assessment summary, integrity opinions, approvals, dissent notes (where safely capturable), and effective date.
13.6.2 Supersession. Any change to an Execution Vehicle posture shall follow correction/supersession discipline, with public notice where safe.
PART XIV — AMENDMENTS
14.1 Constitutional invariants; non-derogation
14.1.1 Invariants. The following are constitutional invariants and shall not be weakened, circumvented, suspended, or effectively nullified by policy, practice, side letters, Chapter arrangements, College rules, donor terms, or informal custom:
(a) Non-state status and non-representation;
(b) Strict non-partisanship and prohibition on electoral activity;
(c) Independence from governments, factions, donor blocs, corporate control groups, and religious authorities, including donor concentration caps;
(d) Non-execution boundary for regulated financial and market activities;
(e) Protected participation, including handling classes, safety-first disclosure, and anti-doxxing posture;
(f) Method independence, including publication autonomy, correction discipline, and supersession integrity; and
(g) Integrity oversight, including functional independence of integrity offices and enforceable sanctions.
14.1.2 Anti-circumvention rule. No amendment or interpretation may be adopted that, in substance, produces a prohibited outcome while preserving compliant wording.
14.1.3 Safety supremacy. Where a conflict exists between maximum transparency and credible safety risk, safety controls under Part X govern, provided that internal audit trails and records discipline are preserved.
14.2 Amendment discipline; notice, readings, and thresholds
14.2.1 Written form required. Amendments shall be adopted only in written form, with an assigned revision identifier, a redline record against the prior version, and an explanatory note stating: rationale, scope, and expected effects.
14.2.2 Advance notice. Proposed amendments shall be circulated for review in accordance with handling classes, including:
(a) a public-safe summary where feasible; and
(b) a Controlled or Restricted full text where safety requires.
14.2.3 Two-reading process. Amendments require two readings:
(a) First reading: introduction, questions, and referral to integrity offices and the Method & Statistics Council for written views;
(b) Second reading: final text with recorded votes and any dissent notes (where safely capturable).
14.2.4 Designated Matter threshold. Any amendment is a Designated Matter and shall require:
(a) Board supermajority approval; and
(b) Assembly double-concurrence by separate majorities of Chapters and Colleges, unless the Assembly is not yet constituted, in which case transitional rules under 14.3 apply.
14.2.5 Integrity concurrence for invariant-impacting changes. Any amendment that touches, implicates, or plausibly weakens an invariant requires affirmative written concurrence by ECOI, ADI, and SOO, and a method integrity view by the Method & Statistics Council.
14.2.6 Effective date and supersession. Each amendment shall specify an effective date and shall be entered into the registry of governing instruments with supersession discipline.
14.3 Transitional formation milestones (2026); institutional minimum viable operating posture
14.3.1 First 180 days. Within one hundred eighty (180) days of the Effective Date, IDCDC shall, at minimum:
(a) constitute ECOI, ADI, SOO, and CPO, with written charters of authority, protected reporting lines, and escalation routes;
(b) constitute the Method & Statistics Council, including method integrity notice procedures;
(c) adopt donor caps, conflict rules, procurement integrity minima, and handling classification rules;
(d) publish Readiness Rail v1.0 and an indicators baseline note v0.1 (public-safe), with controlled technical appendices where needed;
(e) establish a public-safe document registry with version identifiers, correction posture, and supersession rules; and
(f) recognize initial Chapters and Colleges under provisional or conditional status, with explicit quality gates and renewal clocks.
14.3.2 One-year transition for the Diwān corpus. Within twelve (12) months of the Effective Date, IDCDC shall:
(a) inventory the Diwān corpus;
(b) classify each item as Public, Controlled, or Restricted;
(c) assign provenance notes, method summaries, limitations, correction pathways, and supersession rules; and
(d) record dispositions for items that are unsafe, unverifiable, or non-compliant with the Charter.
14.3.3 Transitional governance fallback. Until the Assembly is fully constituted, the Board shall:
(a) publish transitional decision rules;
(b) document all Designated Matter decisions with enhanced integrity review; and
(c) convene consultative sessions with recognized Chapters and Colleges to preserve legitimacy without surrendering fiduciary responsibility.
14.4 Continuity and resilience; operating under disruption
14.4.1 Continuity by design. IDCDC shall maintain continuity across jurisdictions and disruptions through:
(a) secure virtual modalities;
(b) distributed operational hubs to reduce single-jurisdiction dependency;
(c) documented succession plans for key roles; and
(d) minimum viable operating procedures for governance, integrity offices, handling, and records discipline.
14.4.2 Continuity thresholds. IDCDC shall define minimum continuity thresholds, including:
(a) ability to convene Board decisions securely;
(b) preservation of restricted records and audit trails;
(c) protected participation channels; and
(d) ability to issue method integrity notices and stop-the-line measures.
14.4.3 Emergency posture without emergency powers. Disruption does not create new authorities. The Charter’s invariants remain binding in crisis conditions.
14.5 Dissolution; asset lock and integrity of disposition
14.5.1 High threshold. Dissolution is a Designated Matter requiring:
(a) Board supermajority approval;
(b) Assembly double-concurrence (Chapters and Colleges), where the Assembly exists; and
(c) independent audit and a written dissolution report.
14.5.2 Asset lock. Upon dissolution, remaining assets shall be transferred solely to non-partisan public-interest purposes consistent with this Charter and applicable law, with preference for organizations that:
(a) maintain independence and non-partisanship;
(b) uphold protected participation and safety-aware disclosure; and
(c) preserve educational, cultural, and civic capacity as public goods.
14.5.3 Records protection. Restricted records shall be preserved, transferred, or destroyed only under documented handling rules, with a recorded disposition rationale and legal compliance review.
14.6 Entry into force; binding effect across the federation
14.6.1 Effective date. This Charter enters into force on 1 January 2026, or such later date as adopted by the founding Board in a written instrument of adoption.
14.6.2 Binding condition of participation. This Charter is binding upon all IDCDC organs, Chapters, Colleges, officers, credentialed participants, and members as a condition of recognition, participation, credentialing, and use of marks.
14.6.3 Precedence. In case of conflict:
(a) this Charter prevails over all subordinate policies, guidelines, Chapter rules, College rules, and cooperation instruments; and
(b) integrity opinions and handling rules prevail over informal custom where safety is implicated.
Publication note (integrated)
14.7.1 Public by default; safety by design. This Charter is intended for public publication. Where publication of specific details creates credible risk to individuals, communities, or operational integrity, IDCDC shall publish redacted summaries and preserve internal Restricted audit trails consistent with Parts X and XI.
14.7.2 Correction discipline applies. Any public copy of this Charter shall be subject to correction and supersession controls, including visible version identifiers and change notes.
DISCLAIMER — PERIMETER, NON-RELIANCE, AND NON-ENDORSEMENT
Non-state and non-representation. IDCDC is a civic, civilian, non-state body and does not represent Iran, any host country, or any public authority.
Non-partisan posture. IDCDC does not engage in electoral campaigning or partisan mobilization and does not endorse parties, candidates, or factions.
Non-execution boundary. IDCDC does not execute regulated financial activities and does not underwrite, custody, pool, route, hold, or disburse funds for third parties, nor operate payments or regulated markets.
No professional advice. Publications and outputs are informational and do not constitute legal, financial, investment, or regulatory advice.
No implied endorsement. Reference to any partner, donor, institution, or third party does not imply endorsement. Use of IDCDC’s name, marks, credentials, or content must comply with misrepresentation rules and revocable permissions under Part XI.
Limitation of liability. To the maximum extent permitted by law, IDCDC disclaims liability arising from third-party reliance on its outputs, while maintaining good-faith method integrity and correction discipline.