# Jury Constitution This constitution establishes governance through randomly selected juries that deliberate on and decide community proposals. ## Article 1: Governance Principle ### Section 1.1: Sortition Democracy This community governs through sortition: - Decision-making juries selected randomly from members - Random selection ensures fairness and broad representation - Rotating juries spread governance participation - Counteracts influence of wealth, connections, or charisma ### Section 1.2: Jury Authority Juries have authority to: - Decide on proposals within their scope - Make binding decisions for the community - Interpret policies and constitution - Authorize administrative actions ### Section 1.3: The Legislature The Legislature coordinates governance: - Receives and organizes proposals - Selects juries for proposals - Manages the policy register - Ensures orderly governance process ## Article 2: Membership and Eligibility ### Section 2.1: Member Rights All community members have the right to: - Petition for proposals - Be selected for jury service - Observe jury deliberations - Appeal jury decisions to new jury - Access the policy register ### Section 2.2: Jury Eligibility Members are eligible for jury service if: - Active member for at least 60 days - Agreed to code of conduct - Not currently serving on another jury - No conflict of interest on specific proposal - Bot tracks eligibility ### Section 2.3: Jury Duty Jury service is a civic responsibility: - Members should accept when selected - Can decline for valid reasons - Serve for duration of assigned proposal - Compensated if community decides ## Article 3: Proposals and Petitions ### Section 3.1: Petition Process Any member can petition: 1. Draft proposal with clear question 2. Gather signatures (minimum 5% of eligible members) 3. Submit to Legislature via @govbot 4. Legislature validates and processes ### Section 3.2: Proposal Types Proposals can address: - Policy changes - Resource allocation - Administrative actions - Constitutional amendments - Platform configuration - Moderation policies ### Section 3.3: Proposal Requirements Valid proposals must: - State clear decision question - Provide necessary context - Identify impact and scope - Suggest implementation approach - Include timeframe if relevant ## Article 4: The Legislature ### Section 4.1: Legislature Composition The Legislature consists of: - 7 members selected by sortition - 6-month rotating terms - 3-4 members rotate out every 3 months - Ensures continuity and fresh perspectives ### Section 4.2: Legislature Responsibilities The Legislature: - Receives and reviews petitions - Validates proposal requirements - Determines jury size for each proposal - Conducts sortition for juries - Maintains policy register - Tracks jury decisions ### Section 4.3: Legislature Operations Legislature operates via: - Regular meetings (at least biweekly) - Simple majority for routine decisions - All meetings open to observation - Minutes published - Bot facilitates operations ## Article 5: Jury Selection and Composition ### Section 5.1: Sortition Process Juries selected randomly: 1. Legislature determines jury size (5-11 members) 2. Bot identifies eligible members 3. Random selection from eligible pool 4. Members notified of selection 5. Jury confirmed when members accept ### Section 5.2: Jury Size Jury size based on proposal scope: - Routine decisions: 5 members - Significant policies: 7 members - Major changes: 9 members - Constitutional amendments: 11 members ### Section 5.3: Conflict of Interest Members must decline jury service if: - Direct personal interest in outcome - Close relationship with petitioner - Unable to be impartial - Bot tracks recusals ## Article 6: Jury Deliberation ### Section 6.1: Deliberation Process Juries decide through deliberation: 1. Review proposal and context 2. Hear from petitioners 3. Discuss among jury members 4. Seek additional information if needed 5. Deliberate toward decision 6. Reach verdict Typical timeline: 10-14 days ### Section 6.2: Information Gathering Juries can: - Request presentations from petitioners - Invite expert input - Ask questions of community - Research relevant information - Consult policy register and precedents - Bot assists with information access ### Section 6.3: Jury Autonomy During deliberation: - Jury operates independently - Community members can submit input but cannot participate in jury discussion - Jury determines its own process - Jury decides when ready to vote ## Article 7: Jury Decisions ### Section 7.1: Decision Making Juries decide by majority vote: - Each juror has equal vote - Majority needed for proposal to pass - Ties result in proposal failing - Votes can be anonymous or public (jury decides) ### Section 7.2: Written Opinions Jury publishes decision with: - Verdict (approve/reject) - Reasoning and rationale - Implementation guidance if approved - Any dissenting opinions - Bot publishes and archives decision ### Section 7.3: Implementation Approved proposals: - Entered into policy register - Bot implements authorized actions - Legislature tracks implementation - Community notified of changes ## Article 8: Policy Register ### Section 8.1: The Register The policy register contains: - All approved proposals and policies - Jury decisions and reasoning - Implementation status - Constitutional amendments - Governance precedents ### Section 8.2: Register Maintenance Legislature maintains register: - Organizes by topic and date - Keeps register current - Archives superseded policies - Ensures public accessibility - Bot provides register database ### Section 8.3: Register as Precedent Jury decisions serve as precedent: - Future juries consult past decisions - Precedent provides consistency - Juries can distinguish or overturn precedent - Constitutional interpretations especially weighty ## Article 9: Appeals and Reconsideration ### Section 9.1: Appeal Process Decisions can be appealed: 1. Member petitions for reconsideration 2. Must show new information or error 3. Requires petition signatures (10% of members) 4. New jury selected to hear appeal 5. Original jury decision stands unless overturned ### Section 9.2: Constitutional Challenges Decisions can be challenged as unconstitutional: - Special constitutional jury selected (11 members) - Reviews decision against constitution - Can overturn if unconstitutional - Constitutional precedent established ### Section 9.3: Emergency Review For urgent issues: - Emergency jury convened (5 members) - Expedited process (3 days) - Can temporarily halt implementation - Full jury review follows ## Article 10: Administrative Actions ### Section 10.1: Implementing Decisions Jury-approved actions implemented by: - Bot executing authorized actions - Designated community members - Legislature coordinating - All actions logged ### Section 10.2: Moderation Moderation handled by: - Moderation jury for policy - Moderators executing policy - Appeals to randomly selected jury - Bot supports moderation actions ### Section 10.3: Platform Management Platform changes require: - Proposal and jury approval - Technical committee implementation - Legislature oversight - Bot logs all changes ## Article 11: Constitutional Amendments ### Section 11.1: Amendment Process To amend this constitution: 1. Petition with 10% member signatures 2. Legislature selects 11-member constitutional jury 3. Extended deliberation (21 days minimum) 4. Requires 2/3 jury supermajority (8 of 11) 5. Bot updates constitution if approved ### Section 11.2: Constitutional Interpretation For interpretation questions: - Constitutional jury selected - Reviews question and precedents - Issues interpretation - Binding on future juries - Can be overturned by constitutional amendment ### Section 11.3: Core Principles Amendments should preserve: - Random jury selection - Fair representation - Petition rights - Policy register - Appeal mechanisms --- ## Implementation Notes This constitution creates sortition-based governance: 1. **Random Selection**: Fair representation through lottery 2. **Rotating Participation**: Many members serve over time 3. **Informed Decisions**: Juries deliberate thoroughly 4. **Precedent**: Policy register provides consistency 5. **Accountability**: Appeals and constitutional review The bot should conduct sortition fairly, support jury operations, maintain the policy register, implement approved decisions, and ensure transparency throughout the process.