Tricameral Governance
Constitutional decisions require the agreement of three chambers: the Chamber of Vigías, the Chamber of Expertos and the Chamber of Aliados. No chamber may modify the founding document on its own.
The Chamber of Vigías brings together a rotating selection of active Vigías with accumulated trust above the founding threshold. Its members are chosen by lottery among those who meet the criteria. The lottery is held once a year and remains publicly traced.
The Chamber of Expertos brings together the verified Expertos of the disciplines relevant to the operation of the platform. Its composition reflects the diversity of fields of knowledge that sustain the technical validation of observations.
The Chamber of Aliados brings together the active Aliados that meet criteria of seniority and minimum redemption volume. Its voice represents the institutional and commercial fabric that sustains the seed circuit in its real dimension.
A constitutional amendment requires a simple majority in each chamber. The concurrence is strict: a lack of majority in a single chamber is sufficient to halt the amendment. Operational decisions of smaller scale are resolved in management councils with public reports directed to the three chambers.
Commentary
The tricameral structure protects Alerta from the most predictable risk of civic platforms: capture by a single interest group. A platform whose governance rests only on its users can be coopted by activist blocs; a platform whose governance rests only on its experts can become a technocracy; a platform whose governance rests only on its allies can confuse solvency with legitimacy. The three chambers sustain each other.
Tricameral governance inherits lessons from several republican traditions. The model distinguishes, in line with that tradition, between the citizen body (popular legitimacy), the technical body (professional competence) and the institutional body (representation of the entities that sustain the system day to day). Alerta's novelty consists in formalizing that distinction within a digital civic platform, where the three voices have traditionally been confused in a single undifferentiated interface.
Amendment procedure
A constitutional amendment proposal follows a procedure with public timeframes:
- Submission. Any member of any of the three chambers may submit an amendment proposal. The proposal is published in the constitutional repository.
- Comment period. Two weeks during which the three chambers and the general public may send observations. Comments are recorded.
- Chamber deliberation. Each chamber deliberates separately during an additional two weeks. The deliberation is recorded and summarized publicly.
- Vote. Each chamber votes independently. A simple majority in each chamber is required.
- Ratification. If all three chambers approve, the amendment enters into force with a grace period of four weeks during which the operational systems adjust.
Cross-references
- Article II · The Waqf Corpus may only be modified by tricameral agreement
- Article XIII · Institutional portability preserves this structure
- Article XIV · Dissolution demands a reinforced two-thirds majority