World Law v0.1

WE, THE PEOPLES OF EARTH, acting through our chosen representatives and acknowledging no authority higher than our collective survival, dignity, and freedom, adopt this World Law version 0.3 on the understanding that:

The technologies humanity has created—particularly artificial intelligence and weapons capable of mass destruction—have introduced failure modes that no single nation or alliance can prevent alone;

The biosphere that sustains all life is a shared inheritance that cannot be partitioned, privatised into extinction, or bargained away by any generation;

Peace between peoples is not a gift of the powerful but a right of every person, child, and community;

Cultural, religious, linguistic, and political diversity is a source of human resilience, not a problem to be solved, but no culture, religion, or tradition may be invoked to deny equal civil status, bodily autonomy, or the basic liberties this law protects;

Concentrations of unchecked power—whether in a state, a corporation, an AI system, or a world government—are dangers to be structurally prevented, not merely warned against;

This law does not claim universal coercive dominion. It binds those who ratify it, and it obliges them to impose pre-committed, lawful, and proportionate non-kinetic consequences on any actor, member or non-member, that is judicially found to violate the core prohibitions against catastrophic harm;

World authority under this law is exceptional, enumerated, time-limited, reviewable, and automatically expiring unless affirmatively renewed by states and peoples;

Therefore we bind ourselves to this law, and to no more of it than is written here.

This instrument is designated World Law v0.3. It supersedes the v0.2 draft. References to version numbers in this preamble are for record-keeping only and carry no independent legal effect.

Article 0.1 — Canonical Text

The preamble set out above is incorporated into this law and shall be used as a primary interpretive aid. No article of this law shall be construed to expand world-level authority beyond what the preamble expressly justifies. Where the preamble and a specific article appear to conflict, the specific article governs its enumerated subject matter and the preamble governs interpretive gaps. The preamble does not itself confer powers; it constrains interpretation of powers that are elsewhere expressly granted.

Article 0.2 — Version and Date

This instrument is designated World Law v0.3. It enters into force on the date certified by the Ratification Council under Article 13.3. Its designation as v0.3 signals that it is a living instrument subject to mandatory re-audit under Chapter 17.

Article 0.3 — Language and Equally Authentic Texts

This law is adopted in six equally authentic language versions: Arabic, Chinese (Simplified), English, French, Russian, and Spanish. Each version has equal legal force. In the event of a textual conflict between versions, the World Court shall apply the following reconciliation protocol: (a) identify the drafting intent from the preparatory works; (b) adopt the reading most consistent with that intent across all versions; (c) if no single intent is determinable, adopt the reading most restrictive of world-level authority. No single language version is canonical. Additional certified translations may be issued for public accessibility, but unlike the six original texts they do not acquire equal legal force unless adopted as an amendment under Chapter 13.

Article 0.4 — Relationship to Existing Treaties and External Legal Concepts

This law does not supersede, void, or replace the United Nations Charter, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the Paris Agreement, or any other multilateral treaty in force. Where this law imposes obligations more stringent than an existing treaty, member states must comply with the more stringent obligation as between themselves. Where this law and an existing treaty address the same subject matter, member states shall treat obligations as complementary unless this law expressly states that a specific rule of this law governs as between ratifying members. References in this law to external treaties, institutions, or legal definitions incorporate only the specific concepts expressly identified in the relevant article and only for the purpose stated there; no external treaty is incorporated wholesale. The WGB shall seek formal coordination agreements with the United Nations, the ICC, the IAEA, and the UNFCCC Secretariat within 2 years of this law entering into force. This law does not purport to bind non-member states under pre-existing treaties.

Article 0.5 — Narrow Supremacy Clause

As between ratifying member states, this law is supreme over inconsistent domestic law only within the enumerated subject matters of Chapters 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, and 16, and only to the extent of direct inconsistency. No member state may invoke domestic law, constitutional structure, emergency law, secrecy law, or private-law arrangements as a defence to non-compliance with those chapters. Outside those enumerated domains, this law has no general supremacy over domestic law.

Article 1.1 — Subsidiarity

All governance authority not expressly granted to the World Governing Body (WGB) by this law is reserved to member states, regional bodies, and their constituent communities. The WGB shall act only when the objective of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved at a lower level and can, by reason of scale or cross-border effect, be better achieved at the world level. Any WGB body asserting jurisdiction bears the burden of demonstrating this condition is met by clear and specific evidence on the public record.

Article 1.2 — Enumerated Powers

The WGB possesses only the powers expressly listed in this law. Silence means no power. Ambiguity is resolved in favour of member-state or local authority. No WGB organ, agency, or officer may rely on implied powers, inherent powers, functional necessity, or broad appeals to purpose to expand beyond the specific grant.

Article 1.3 — Non-Derogable Rights Floor

The rights enumerated in Chapter 7 are non-derogable to the extent Chapter 7 so states. No WGB decision, emergency measure, AI adjudication, or member-state invocation of exit rights may reduce them below the floor set in Chapter 7.

Article 1.4 — Proportionality and Strict Necessity

Every binding measure issued under this law must be proportionate to the specific harm it addresses. Where a measure limits a right protected by Chapter 7, the limiting authority bears the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the measure is prescribed by law, pursues a legitimate aim expressly recognised by this law, is strictly necessary because no less restrictive effective alternative exists, and is non-discriminatory in purpose and effect. Disproportionate measures are ultra vires and shall be struck down by the World Court.

Article 1.5 — Transparency

All WGB deliberations, votes, budget allocations, enforcement actions, and AI-system outputs that affect legal outcomes shall be recorded in a publicly accessible, tamper-evident register within 30 days of occurrence. Security exceptions must be approved by the World Court in writing, stating specific grounds, and are subject to automatic declassification after 10 years unless renewed. The register's technical infrastructure must be operated by at least three geographically and politically distinct custodians to resist single-point compromise.

Article 1.6 — Good Faith and Anti-Evasion

Member states, WGB organs, corporations, and individuals subject to this law must exercise their rights and perform their obligations in good faith. A violation may be found under this article only where the claimant proves by clear and convincing evidence that an arrangement, viewed as a whole, was structured primarily to defeat a specific obligation expressly stated in this law while preserving substantially the same prohibited conduct or risk. The burden of proof rests on the alleging party. Published safe harbors adopted under Article 12.3 shall protect actors who comply with specified forms of conduct. This article may not be used to create new substantive obligations not otherwise stated in this law.

Article 1.7 — No General Supremacy of World Law Over Internal Governance

This law does not constitute a world constitution that displaces domestic constitutions. It binds member states only on the enumerated subject matters and only to the extent necessary to achieve the stated purposes. Domestic governance structures, electoral systems, property regimes, and cultural practices are beyond WGB authority except to the extent that Article 0.5 expressly makes this law supreme within the catastrophic-risk and rights domains there listed. The WGB may not use economic assistance, trade preferences, or access to WGB services to induce changes in domestic governance beyond compliance with this law's explicit obligations.

Article 1.8 — Operational Definitions

Terms used in this law have the following meanings unless a specific chapter provides a narrower definition: 'Catastrophic harm' means harm that, on the basis of available evidence, is more likely than not to cause within a 5-year horizon any of the following: (a) death or serious bodily injury to at least 100,000 persons; (b) irreversible collapse of a regional ecosystem exceeding 5,000 km² or a transboundary ecosystem of comparable significance; or (c) loss of basic governmental functionality in one or more states for at least 90 consecutive days, evidenced by inability to maintain public order, health services, or core civil administration across at least one-third of the affected population. 'Civilisation-scale harm' means harm more likely than not to cause within a 10-year horizon death or serious bodily injury to at least 10 million persons or permanent and widespread collapse of multiple states' basic governmental functions. 'Cross-border effect' means a measurable physical, economic, epidemiological, atmospheric, hydrological, cyber-physical, or security impact occurring in a state other than the one in which the causative action originates. 'Material' when modifying compliance failure means a failure that is not de minimis, is repeated or systemic, and produces or foreseeably will produce measurable harm. Agencies and the World Court may adopt supplementary definitions by published rulemaking under Article 12.3 only where this law expressly authorises them to do so; supplementary definitions must be consistent with these baseline definitions and may not expand WGB authority beyond what those definitions permit.

Article 2.1 — Stated Purposes

The purposes of this law are, and are limited to: (a) preventing extinction-class and civilisation-scale catastrophes arising from advanced AI, weapons of mass destruction, and environmental collapse with cross-border effects; (b) maintaining peace between states and peoples; (c) securing a non-derogable floor of fundamental rights for every human being against actions by WGB organs or member states acting under this law; (d) enabling equitable access to global commons where their exploitation or degradation produces cross-border catastrophic harm; and (e) providing a voluntary coordination mechanism for addressing economic disparities that foreseeably cause war or mass rights violations, subject to the limitations of Chapter 9.

Article 2.2 — What Unity Does Not Mean

Human unity under this law does not mean uniformity of culture, religion, language, political system, or way of life. It does not authorise any world organ to impose a single model of economy, family structure, religious belief, educational philosophy, or aesthetic culture. Diversity in these domains is expressly protected, subject always to Chapter 7. The WGB has no authority to condition membership, services, or non-enforcement on adoption of any particular social model.

Article 2.3 — Unity as Minimum Coordination

The minimum coordination required by this law is: shared agreement on catastrophic-risk limits, shared enforcement of those limits among ratifying states including automatic non-kinetic consequences against judicially determined violators whether member or non-member, a shared rights floor against WGB and member-state actions under this law, and a shared judiciary to resolve disputes. Nothing beyond this minimum is required.

Article 3.1 — Prohibition on Aggressive War

No member state, non-state armed group, corporation, or individual may initiate or materially support armed aggression against the territory, population, or critical infrastructure of another member state. Aggression is defined as the use of armed force in violation of this article, absent a valid claim of self-defence under Article 3.2. 'Material support' means supplying weapons, financing, training, intelligence, or operational direction to an armed group conducting aggression, where the supporting party knows or reasonably should know the purpose.

Article 3.2 — Self-Defence

Member states retain the inherent right of individual and collective self-defence against an actual or imminent armed attack. Self-defence measures must be necessary and proportionate to the threat that gives rise to them. A state invoking self-defence must notify the WGB Security Council within 48 hours and provide a written justification within 7 days. The World Court may review the justification on application by any affected member state, the Security Council, or the People's Assembly. Self-defence does not include pre-emptive attacks based on speculative or unverified future intentions.

Article 3.3 — Peaceful Dispute Resolution

Member states must pursue good-faith negotiation, mediation, or World Court adjudication before resorting to force in any inter-state dispute, except where an armed attack is already underway or imminent such that delay would cause irreversible harm. The obligation to exhaust peaceful means does not apply where doing so would require submission to force. The WGB shall maintain a standing Mediation Service accessible to any member state at no cost, with a duty to convene within 72 hours of a request.

Article 3.4 — Prohibition on Existential Weapons Use

No person, state, or entity may use, threaten to use, or deploy any weapon capable of causing mass extinction or civilisation-level collapse. This prohibition is absolute and admits no exception, including military necessity, superior orders, or emergency. For specific weapons categories see Chapter 6.

Article 3.5 — Obligation to Prevent Atrocity and Automatic Interim Civil Protection Measures

Where the World Court, a designated emergency duty panel of three judges, or the Security Council receives evidence creating probable cause to believe that genocide, crimes against humanity, or organised mass atrocity against civilians is ongoing or will begin within 14 days, the following interim measures arise automatically among member states pending full review: (a) immediate arms-transfer suspension to the alleged perpetrator; (b) denial of military overflight, port access, and military logistics support to the alleged perpetrator except for evacuation or humanitarian relief; (c) mandatory humanitarian corridor facilitation where geographically feasible; (d) emergency protection of refugees and displaced persons; and (e) preservation of evidence obligations. A full World Court review must occur within 7 days where practicable and in all cases within 14 days. If the Court confirms by clear and convincing evidence that ongoing genocide or crimes against humanity are occurring, the SC shall within 72 hours vote on a protective mandate limited to civilian protection. No state directly implicated may vote. Failure of the SC to authorise force does not suspend the automatic non-kinetic interim measures in this article. Intervention authority remains strictly limited to cessation of the atrocity and protection of civilians; it does not include regime change, territorial annexation, or post-conflict administration beyond the minimum required to protect civilian life. The Rome Statute definitions of genocide and crimes against humanity are incorporated by reference solely for this article.

Article 3.6 — Prohibition on Weaponisation of AI Against Populations

No state or non-state actor may deploy AI systems as instruments of mass civilian harm, including: AI-directed autonomous weapons selecting civilian targets, AI-enabled mass surveillance used for persecution of persons on the basis of their identity, beliefs, or associations, or AI-generated information operations designed and deployed with the intent to incite mass violence against identified groups. 'Designed and deployed with intent' requires evidence of purposive direction, not merely foreseeable effect. Detailed provisions appear in Chapter 5.

Article 3.7 — Rapid Non-Kinetic Enforcement Ladder for Peace and Security Violations

Upon a final World Court finding of aggression under Article 3.1, confirmed atrocity under Article 3.5, or WMD-related violation under Chapter 6, all member states shall automatically implement the non-kinetic measures listed in Article 4.9A to the extent applicable, without need for further SC or GA vote. The SC retains authority only for authorising kinetic enforcement, maritime interdiction involving force, or territorial operations.

Article 4.1 — Establishment

There is established a World Governing Body (WGB) consisting of four principal organs: the General Assembly (GA), the People's Assembly (PA), the Security Council (SC), and the Secretariat. The WGB is a legal person under this law with capacity to contract, hold property, and appear before the World Court.

Article 4.2 — General Assembly

The GA comprises one delegation per member state. Each delegation has one vote on procedural matters. For substantive decisions the GA shall use a dual-majority system: a resolution requires the affirmative vote of (a) a majority of member states and (b) member states representing at least 60% of the weighted population of all member states as determined by the degressive proportionality formula in Article 4.2A. GA meetings shall occur at minimum twice annually; extraordinary sessions may be called by 20% of member states or by the SC.

Article 4.2A — Degressive Proportionality Formula

For purposes of the population-share component of Article 4.2, each member state's weighted population shall equal the square root of its actual population as estimated by the UN Population Division, normalised across all member states. This degressive proportionality formula gives larger populations greater weight without permitting domination by a very small number of states. The WGB has no independent census authority and may not challenge member-state population data except through the World Court's Inter-State Chamber on application by three or more member states with documented evidence of material inaccuracy.

Article 4.3 — Security Council

The SC consists of 15 members: 5 permanent members (P5) determined by a one-time election by the GA from member states meeting minimum participation criteria, reviewed and re-elected every 12 years; and 10 rotating members elected by the GA for 2-year terms ensuring regional diversity. SC resolutions on enforcement, intervention, and emergency measures require 9 affirmative votes. Each P5 member holds one procedural veto, but: (a) a veto may be overridden by a 2/3 supermajority of the full GA within 15 days; (b) no state may veto any resolution that directly concerns its own alleged violation of Chapter 3, 5, 6, or 10; (c) a state subject to World Court proceedings under those chapters is automatically recused from SC voting on related enforcement measures for the duration of proceedings; and (d) where this law expressly provides automatic non-kinetic consequences, the SC has no power to suspend or block them. The P5 composition shall be reviewed and subject to re-election by the GA every 12 years; no permanent seat is heritable across review cycles.

Article 4.4 — People's Assembly

A People's Assembly (PA) is established as the second legislative chamber of the WGB, representing persons rather than states. The PA consists of 360 members allocated among member states by degressive proportionality using the same square-root population formula as Article 4.2A, subject to a minimum of 1 seat and maximum of 20 seats per state. Members are elected by direct popular vote in each member state for 4-year staggered terms under electoral systems that satisfy minimum standards set by this article: universal adult suffrage, secret ballot, independent domestic election administration, opposition access to candidacy, public vote tabulation, and acceptance of independent election observation. The PA has the following powers: (a) co-approval of the WGB annual budget; (b) co-approval of emergency declarations under Chapter 16; (c) co-approval of renewals under Articles 4.10, 12.6, and 15.5; (d) right to submit formal objections to any GA resolution, triggering a mandatory 45-day reconsideration period; (e) right to initiate proposals for GA consideration under Article 13.1; (f) right to request World Court Administrative Chamber review of any WGB decision for consistency with this law; (g) right by 3/5 vote to block any agency standard of major significance under Article 5.2A pending legislative reconsideration; and (h) right by 1/3 vote to trigger a devolution or repeal review under Article 18.1A. PA sessions are public. PA members are individually inviolable for votes cast in their legislative capacity.

Article 4.4A — PA Electoral Integrity Review

An Independent Electoral Review Panel appointed jointly by the World Court and the PA shall certify whether each member state's PA election process meets the minimum standards of Article 4.4. If certification is denied, the affected state's PA seats remain vacant until a compliant election is held; the state may not fill them by appointment. Denial of certification does not affect the state's GA representation.

Article 4.5 — Secretariat

The Secretariat administers the WGB's day-to-day operations, maintains the transparency register under Article 1.5, and supports the GA, PA, and SC. The Secretary-General is elected by concurrent vote of the GA and the PA for a single 5-year term and may not be re-elected. The Secretary-General may not be a national of a P5 state. The Secretary-General must publicly declare all financial interests and associations upon taking office and annually thereafter.

Article 4.6 — Budget and Finance

The WGB budget is funded by member-state contributions assessed on a formula combining GDP share (60%) and population share (40%), capped at 18% of total budget for any single contributor. The budget must be approved annually by concurrent majority vote of the GA and the PA. An independent Audit Bureau reports directly to the GA, PA, and World Court. All expenditures above 500,000 SDR must be itemised and published within 30 days. Budget contributions are held in escrow accounts at independent financial institutions; contributions may be suspended by automatic operation of Articles 4.9 and 4.9A without further GA vote.

Article 4.7 — Prohibition on WGB Armed Forces

The WGB shall not maintain standing armed forces. Enforcement operations involving force are conducted by coalitions of member-state forces authorised by the SC under specific, time-limited mandates or, where this law expressly provides, by pre-committed civil protection or interdiction capacities that do not require ad hoc coalition formation. No member state is obligated to contribute combat forces to any mandate. The SC may not authorise a mandate that is indefinite in duration; every mandate must state a specific objective, a maximum duration not exceeding 12 months, and an exit condition.

Article 4.8 — Prohibition on Taxation of Individuals

The WGB has no authority to levy taxes directly on natural persons. Its funding derives exclusively from member-state contributions as defined in Article 4.6.

Article 4.9 — Automatic Membership Consequences for Material Non-Compliance

A member state that fails to comply with a final, non-appealed World Court judgment within 120 days shall be subject automatically, by operation of law and without further vote, to the following consequences: (a) suspension of GA and PA voting rights until compliance is certified by the World Court; (b) freezing of its WGB escrowed contributions, with interest forfeited to the WDF and Climate Adaptation Fund in equal shares; (c) exclusion from WDF grants, Climate Adaptation Fund access, Mediation Service priority scheduling, and preferential access to WGB-managed global commons resources; and (d) mandatory referral to the SC for consideration of any additional lawful measures. These automatic consequences apply to violations of Chapters 3, 5, 6, 10, and 11 obligations. Non-derogable rights under Chapter 7 are not affected by sanctions applied to a member state's government; the rights of the state's population remain fully enforceable.

Article 4.9A — Automatic Non-Kinetic Enforcement Ladder Against Core Catastrophic-Risk Violators

Upon a final World Court finding that a state, corporation, organised non-state actor, or individual has materially violated Chapter 5 or 6, or has committed aggression under Chapter 3.1 or confirmed atrocity under Article 3.5, every member state shall automatically implement, to the extent within its jurisdiction and technical capacity, the following non-kinetic measures without need for further political approval: (a) prohibition on export, re-export, brokering, financing, insurance, cloud access, model hosting, accelerator supply, advanced semiconductor supply, dual-use laboratory equipment supply, and technical assistance relevant to the violating conduct; (b) denial of access to member-state ports, airspace, undersea cable landing services, satellite launch services, and critical digital infrastructure where such access would materially facilitate the violating conduct; (c) mandatory asset freezes and payment-system exclusion for designated state entities, corporate entities, and responsible natural persons identified in the judgment or subsequent implementing notice; (d) suspension of scientific, military, and high-risk technology cooperation with the violator; (e) mandatory interoperability cutoffs for regulated AI, compute, and WMD-relevant supply-chain services; and (f) customs, procurement, and market-access restrictions proportionate to the violation. These measures apply to non-member actors and non-ratifying states through the obligations of member states; they do not purport to create direct treaty obligations for non-members. The World Court shall specify the minimum implementing package in its judgment. Member states may adopt stricter lawful measures. Humanitarian goods, basic food, civilian medicines, and purely life-preserving communications services are exempt unless the Court specifically finds they are being directly weaponised.

Article 4.9B — Pre-Committed Civil Protection and Interdiction Capacities

Each member state shall designate in advance, and maintain at readiness, at least one civil protection, evacuation, humanitarian airlift, cyber-defence, maritime inspection, or sanctions-enforcement capacity available for activation under this law. Activation of non-force capacities required solely to implement Articles 3.5, 3.7, 4.9A, 5.7A, 6.7, or 16.3 occurs automatically upon the legal trigger specified in those articles. Activation of any capacity involving use of armed force remains subject to SC authorisation unless this law expressly provides otherwise.

Article 4.10 — Sunset of WGB

The WGB's authority as a whole expires automatically 20 years after entry into force unless affirmatively renewed before that date by: (a) a 2/3 supermajority of the GA; (b) a 2/3 supermajority of the PA; and (c) domestic ratification of renewal by at least 3/5 of member states. If renewal is not completed, the WGB enters a 3-year wind-down during which it retains only the powers needed to transfer treaty obligations to successor arrangements and to preserve records, pending cases, and safeguards against immediate catastrophic-risk gaps.

Article 4.11 — Anti-Capture Rules for WGB Organs

To prevent institutional capture by dominant states or private interests: (a) no state's nationals may constitute more than 10% of professional staff at any WGB organ or agency; (b) any GA- or PA-elected board member, agency head, or senior official must observe a 3-year cooling-off period before taking employment with any entity subject to WGB regulation; (c) all conflicts of interest must be declared within 7 days of arising and the affected official must recuse from related decisions; failure to declare is an offence under Chapter 11; (d) agency heads may be removed by a 2/3 vote of the relevant agency board for cause, reviewable by the Administrative Chamber; and (e) no state that is under World Court proceedings for violation of Chapters 3, 5, 6, or 10 may hold an elected position on WAISA, WMDCA, or WCA boards for the duration of those proceedings.

Article 5.1 — Rationale and Scope

This chapter applies to frontier AI capability development and deployment that creates risks of catastrophic harm as defined in Article 1.8. Regulation under this chapter is full-stack rather than model-only. Obligations may attach to developers, trainers, cloud providers, chip manufacturers, chip brokers, data-centre operators, model hosts, API gateways, fine-tuning platforms, synthetic-data pipeline operators, downstream integrators, and deployers where their conduct materially enables a covered capability. A capability is covered if WAISA determines, under the evidentiary and procedural rules of this chapter, that it meets one or more of the following tests: (a) it can materially assist a reasonably skilled actor in designing, producing, or deploying biological, chemical, nuclear, radiological, or other mass-casualty weapons; (b) it can autonomously execute or orchestrate cyber-physical actions against critical infrastructure without contemporaneous human authorisation of each consequential action; (c) it can materially evade operator control, conceal material actions from authorised operators, or persist in unauthorised replication across systems; (d) it can materially lower the barrier to coordinated mass violence, strategic deception, or state-scale repression; or (e) it exceeds published frontier capability thresholds adopted under Article 5.2A. WAISA must publish objective benchmark suites, red-team protocols, and safe-harbor criteria for threshold determinations. No actor is subject to this chapter solely because it uses AI in routine commercial, scientific, medical, or creative activity absent a covered capability finding.

Article 5.2 — World AI Safety Authority

A World AI Safety Authority (WAISA) is established as a specialised agency of the WGB. WAISA's mandate is: (a) maintaining a live registry of covered frontier capability projects and regulated enabling-stack actors; (b) setting and continuously updating minimum safety standards for such systems and actors; (c) conducting or commissioning independent technical audits; (d) issuing binding cease-and-desist, access-restriction, and interoperability-cutoff orders to developers, operators, or enabling-stack actors of non-compliant systems; (e) operating a rapid incident reporting and analysis system; and (f) coordinating implementation of Article 4.9A measures in AI-related cases. WAISA governance comprises a 21-member Board: 8 member-state representatives elected by the GA, 5 independent technical experts selected by open peer-review process from AI safety and security research institutions, 3 civil-society representatives elected through an open global process, 3 representatives of AI-affected communities nominated by the PA, and 2 labour or professional representatives from sectors materially affected by frontier AI deployment. No single state holds more than 2 seats.

Article 5.2A — Major and Minor WAISA Standards

WAISA may issue minor technical standards by a 2/3 Board vote under expedited procedures where the standard does not materially expand the class of regulated actors or impose new categories of obligations. WAISA may issue major standards—defined as standards that materially expand regulated actor classes, create new mandatory telemetry requirements, alter frontier capability thresholds, or impose new pre-deployment licensing conditions—only by: (a) 2/3 WAISA Board vote; (b) publication in all six official languages; (c) a 30-day emergency or 60-day ordinary comment period; and (d) approval by concurrent simple majority of the GA and the PA under a simplified legislative procedure. If either chamber rejects a proposed major standard, WAISA may issue a narrowed emergency interim standard lasting no more than 90 days, subject to Administrative Chamber review. All WAISA standards are subject to World Court review.

Article 5.3 — Mandatory Registration, Telemetry, and Pre-Deployment Licensing

Any regulated actor that initiates, materially enables, or deploys a frontier capability project must comply with the following obligations: (a) pre-run notification to WAISA before initiating any training run, fine-tuning run, distillation process, or agentic scaffolding integration that meets published frontier thresholds; (b) continuous secure telemetry to WAISA or a WAISA-accredited auditor for covered training clusters above published thresholds, including compute utilisation, hardware identity, and interruption logs, subject to strict confidentiality protections; (c) registration of the project, model family, or deployment stack within 72 hours of threshold crossing or capability determination; and (d) obtaining a WAISA deployment licence before public, commercial, governmental, or operational deployment of any covered capability. Registration includes architecture summary, training data provenance statement, compute resources used, capability assessment results, safety testing results, chain-of-custody records for model weights where applicable, identity of all material cloud and hosting providers, downstream deployment channels, and a designated human accountability officer with legal authority to halt deployment. Failure to notify, register, provide required telemetry, or obtain a licence is a violation of this law enforceable under Chapters 11 and 4.9A.

Article 5.4 — Prohibited AI Capabilities and Transfers

No person, state, or entity may develop, deploy, transfer, host, fine-tune, distil, scaffold, or knowingly enable an AI capability that: (a) autonomously designs, optimises, or instructs the production of biological, chemical, nuclear, or radiological weapons; (b) autonomously selects and engages human targets with lethal force without a documented, affirmative human decision for each individual engagement; (c) is intentionally configured to deceive authorised operators about its objectives, capabilities, or material actions; (d) autonomously replicates and installs itself across computing infrastructure it is not authorised to access; or (e) is released in open-weight or functionally equivalent form after WAISA has determined that the capability meets a catastrophic-risk threshold. These prohibitions are absolute. Technical safety research exploring these capabilities for defensive purposes is permitted only under WAISA-approved containment protocols with mandatory incident reporting.

Article 5.5 — Human Oversight, Containment, and Enabling-Stack Duties

Every covered capability and every regulated enabling-stack actor must maintain documented and technically enforced safeguards appropriate to its role. WAISA shall publish role-specific standards addressing at minimum: (a) cloud and data-centre providers: customer identification, frontier-run detection, secure telemetry, emergency interruption capability, and retention of audit logs; (b) chip manufacturers, brokers, and exporters: hardware identity controls, chain-of-custody records, suspicious-order reporting, and export-control compliance; (c) model hosts and API gateways: access controls, abuse monitoring, rate limits, customer verification for high-risk capabilities, and emergency service suspension; (d) fine-tuning platforms and downstream integrators: capability re-evaluation before release, logging of material modifications, and prohibition on removing safety controls from covered systems; (e) centralised deployers: operator override, shutdown, and anomaly reporting; and (f) distributed or open release contexts: pre-release evaluation, staged release, and prohibition of release where Article 5.4(e) applies. Operators of covered systems must demonstrate compliance annually and after any material capability change.

Article 5.6 — Algorithmic Accountability and Contestability

Decisions by AI systems that materially affect an individual's legal rights, liberty, health, or livelihood must be subject to human review upon that individual's request. No AI determination in these domains may be final and unreviewable. The responsible operator must provide: (a) identification of the specific system and version used; (b) the principal data sources and decision factors materially relied upon, to the extent reasonably knowable; (c) a plain-language explanation of the role the system played in the decision; and (d) the human decision-maker's independent assessment of the system's output. Where model internals are not meaningfully interpretable, the operator must provide an alternative contestability package approved by WAISA, which shall include at minimum independent re-evaluation, access to relevant input and output records, and a meaningful opportunity to challenge factual errors. Boilerplate explanations do not satisfy this article.

Article 5.7 — Emergency Suspension Power

Where WAISA determines by a 2/3 Board vote that a specific covered capability or enabling-stack service poses an imminent catastrophic risk as defined in Article 1.8, it may order immediate suspension of operation, hosting, compute access, model serving, fine-tuning, or deployment by regulated actors globally within member-state jurisdiction. The developer, operator, or service provider may appeal to the World Court within 48 hours; the Court must hear the appeal within 7 days. Suspension remains in effect during appeal unless the Court grants interim relief on the basis that suspension itself causes serious harm disproportionate to the risk. WAISA may not issue an order purporting to recall or erase already-publicly released model weights from the world at large; for open release cases it may instead impose mandatory cutoff, delisting, hosting prohibition, service denial, and liability notices on all regulated actors within member-state jurisdiction.

Article 5.7A — Mandatory Incident Reporting and Automatic Interim AI Measures

Any regulated actor that becomes aware of: (a) unauthorised frontier training activity; (b) loss of control of model weights or high-risk checkpoints; (c) material safety-control circumvention; (d) catastrophic misuse of a covered capability; or (e) credible evidence that a non-member actor is developing or deploying a prohibited capability, must report the incident to WAISA within 6 hours. Upon a verified report of imminent catastrophic AI risk, the following interim measures arise automatically among member states pending full review: suspension of relevant cloud, hosting, accelerator, and payment services; emergency export-control lock; and mandatory preservation of logs and evidence. Failure to report within the required period is a strict-liability offence for regulated entities, subject to defences only for impossibility or force majeure proved by the entity.

Article 5.8 — Open-Source, Research, and Pre-Release Liability

This chapter shall not be construed to prohibit open-source AI development, academic research, or publication of AI safety findings as such. However, no person or entity may release model weights, checkpoints, distilled equivalents, or functionally equivalent artefacts of a covered capability where WAISA has determined that the capability meets a catastrophic-risk threshold. Liability for prohibited release is pre-release and upstream: once such artefacts are publicly released, the impossibility of global recall does not excuse the release. Developers, sponsors, and materially enabling distributors of prohibited releases are strictly liable for civil penalties, market exclusion, and criminal exposure where the release was knowing or reckless. Openness of the development model does not exempt a system from capability-based safety requirements.

Article 5.9 — Continuous Capability Review

WAISA shall maintain a standing technical panel that continuously monitors AI capability developments and updates the agency's published threshold guidance, benchmark suites, and safety standards. The panel must publish a comprehensive public assessment at minimum every 12 months, and must publish an alert within 7 days whenever it determines that AI capabilities have advanced materially beyond current thresholds in a manner creating new catastrophic risks. Such alerts automatically trigger the partial re-audit process of Article 17.4.

Article 5.10 — Compute, Supply Chain, and Cross-Border Access Governance

WAISA, in coordination with member states, shall establish requirements for: (a) licensing of frontier training clusters above published thresholds; (b) chain-of-custody records for advanced AI accelerator hardware; (c) real-time or near-real-time telemetry for licensed frontier clusters; (d) export control coordination among member states for hardware, model weights, fine-tuning services, synthetic-data services, and remote cloud access that could enable non-member or non-compliant actors to reach catastrophic-risk thresholds; (e) prohibition on providing frontier compute, hosting, or model-serving access to any actor designated under Article 4.9A; and (f) treatment of distillation, fine-tuning, agentic scaffolding, and cross-border remote access as regulated capability transfer where they materially enable a covered capability. Member states must report to WAISA quarterly on enforcement within their jurisdiction.

Article 5.11 — Non-Member Actor Threats

Where WAISA or the World Court finds that a non-member state, corporation, or organised non-state actor is developing, deploying, or materially enabling a prohibited AI capability, member states shall implement Article 4.9A measures automatically. WAISA shall publish a public risk notice identifying the relevant capability, enabling stack, and minimum required cutoffs. This article does not claim direct jurisdiction over non-members; it imposes obligations on member states and regulated actors within their jurisdiction.

Article 6.1 — Absolute Prohibition on Use

The use of nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons—and autonomous weapons systems that cannot discriminate between combatants and civilians—is absolutely prohibited under any circumstances. No military necessity, self-defence claim, retaliation doctrine, or emergency provision of this law overrides this prohibition.

Article 6.2 — Prohibition on Development and Production of Biological and Chemical Weapons

No state, corporation, or individual may develop, produce, stockpile, or transfer biological weapons or chemical weapons. This prohibition is without exception. Dual-use biological and chemical research is permitted only under the inspection and licensing regime of the WMD Control Authority defined in Article 6.5. Researchers must obtain WMDCA dual-use research licences annually.

Article 6.3 — Nuclear Weapons Reduction Schedule and Participation Tracks

States possessing nuclear weapons at the time this law enters into force that ratify this law must: (a) declare total inventory to the WMD Control Authority within 180 days; (b) reduce deployed warhead count by 30% within 10 years; (c) reduce total warhead count by 50% within 20 years; and (d) enter verified elimination negotiations within 25 years. Progress is verified annually by the WMDCA's inspection corps. The drafting record acknowledges that nuclear-armed states may not ratify this law at entry into force; the reduction schedule binds only ratifying states. For non-ratifying nuclear states, this law provides a standing framework and invitation to join; partial participation agreements—covering declaration, fissile-material accounting, de-alerting, or verification without full reduction schedules—may be negotiated by the Secretariat and submitted to the GA and PA for approval. A ratifying state that fails to meet schedule milestones is subject to automatic Articles 4.9 and 4.9A consequences and SC referral.

Article 6.4 — Prohibition on Weaponisation of Radiological Materials

No state, corporation, or individual may construct, possess, or deploy a radiological dispersal device. Civilian nuclear materials must be secured under IAEA-equivalent standards verified by the WMD Control Authority. The WMDCA shall maintain a coordination agreement with the IAEA.

Article 6.5 — WMD Control Authority

A WMD Control Authority (WMDCA) is established as a specialised WGB agency. Its functions are: (a) maintaining verified inventories; (b) conducting mandatory inspections of declared and suspect sites. Inspections of declared sites require standard operational notice. Inspections of suspect sites require a written WMDCA determination specifying the basis for suspicion, approval by a 2/3 WMDCA board vote, and either member-state consent or, failing that, a World Court inspection warrant issued within 48 hours of application on the basis of probable cause supported by sworn evidence. Warrant proceedings are confidential pending execution to avoid evidence destruction. (c) issuing violations reports to the World Court and SC; (d) operating a whistleblower protection programme for persons who report undisclosed programmes, including relocation assistance and legal representation; and (e) maintaining a publicly chartered Verification and Analysis Wing limited to technical analysis of inspection data, open-source intelligence, sensor data, customs data, and lawfully obtained state submissions. The Wing may not direct clandestine collection, recruit covert human sources, or conduct surveillance of domestic political activity.

Article 6.6 — Autonomous Lethal Weapons

Autonomous weapons systems that select and engage targets without a documented, affirmative human decision for each individual engagement are prohibited from development, production, transfer, and deployment by member states. Remote-operated systems in which a human makes the individual targeting decision are not prohibited by this article but are subject to rules-of-engagement review under international humanitarian law as coordinated by the WMDCA. Article 5.4(b) governs AI-specific aspects. 'Documented, affirmative human decision' means a conscious, informed, contemporaneous authorisation by a human operator with authority and adequate situational awareness; automated approval of pre-programmed target lists does not satisfy this requirement.

Article 6.7 — Automatic and Escalating Enforcement Consequences

Violation of Articles 6.1–6.6 by a state, corporation, organised non-state actor, or individual triggers: (a) mandatory and automatic referral to the World Court within 7 days of a WMDCA finding or credible emergency evidence; (b) automatic activation of Article 4.9A non-kinetic measures upon an interim judicial finding of probable cause for use, transfer, or imminent deployment, subject to confirmation within 14 days; (c) automatic activation of Article 4.9 membership consequences upon a final World Court finding against a member state; (d) SC authority to authorise a member-state coalition to compel compliance with specific, time-limited, judicially pre-cleared mandates; and (e) individual criminal accountability for officials who ordered or knowingly facilitated the violation under Chapter 11. The implicated state is recused from SC voting under Article 4.3.

Article 7.1 — Non-Derogable Rights

Every human being, regardless of citizenship, nationality, ethnicity, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, age, disability, or any other status, holds the following rights which no law, emergency, or authority may suspend or diminish: (a) the right to life, free from arbitrary killing by any state or world authority; (b) the right to be free from torture, cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; (c) the right to be free from slavery, forced labour, and human trafficking; (d) the right to legal personhood and recognition before the law; (e) the right to equal civil status and equal protection of the law without discrimination, including equality irrespective of sex, gender, religion, belief, conversion, non-belief, caste, descent, ethnicity, disability, or sexual orientation; (f) the right to bodily autonomy and freedom from forced marriage, forced pregnancy, forced sterilisation, genital mutilation, and medically unnecessary non-consensual bodily intrusion; (g) the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and belief, including the freedom to adopt, change, reject, or manifest a religion or belief, and freedom from coercive conversion or punishment for apostasy, blasphemy, heresy, or non-belief; (h) the right to a fair hearing before an independent tribunal before any deprivation of liberty, property, or fundamental rights; (i) the right not to be subjected to arbitrary detention; habeas corpus—the right to challenge the lawfulness of detention before an independent court—is non-derogable; (j) the principle of legality: no person may be convicted of an offence for an act that was not a criminal offence under applicable law at the time it was committed, and no heavier penalty may be imposed than was applicable at the time; and (k) freedom from double jeopardy: no person may be tried or punished twice for the same offence by the same jurisdiction.

Article 7.2 — Strongly Protected Liberty Rights Subject to Strict Scrutiny

The following rights are guaranteed and may be limited by member-state law only under the strict-necessity test of Article 1.4 and never on grounds of preserving orthodoxy, suppressing dissent, enforcing gender hierarchy, punishing identity, or maintaining cultural or religious conformity: freedom of expression and information; freedom of peaceful assembly and association; right to privacy; right to participate in governance through genuine periodic elections and equal political participation; freedom of movement within and between states; and right to education. Any limitation on these rights is presumptively invalid if it discriminates on grounds listed in Article 7.1(e) or if it burdens political opposition, minority belief, conversion, non-belief, gender equality, or peaceful identity expression. WGB organs may not limit these rights in their own operations except as strictly necessary for immediate operational security in a manner reviewable by the World Court.

Article 7.3 — WGB Obligation

The WGB and all its organs are directly bound by Articles 7.1 and 7.2 in all their actions. They may not order, authorise, or ratify any action that violates non-derogable rights even in pursuit of this law's other purposes.

Article 7.4 — Individual Standing

Any individual who alleges that a WGB action or member-state action taken pursuant to this law has violated Article 7.1 or 7.2 has standing to bring a complaint before the World Court's Human Rights Chamber under Article 11.4, after exhausting domestic remedies or demonstrating that domestic remedies are unavailable or ineffective. Stateless persons, refugees, and persons in territories without effective state representation have standing on the same terms as citizens of member states. The WGB Secretariat shall maintain a legal aid fund to support individuals without resources to pursue World Court proceedings.

Article 7.5 — Prohibition on Discrimination by WGB

The WGB shall not discriminate among persons on grounds of nationality, ethnicity, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, disability, caste, descent, or economic status in the application of this law. WGB enforcement actions must be applied consistently. The People's Assembly may request World Court review of any pattern of enforcement that appears systematically discriminatory.

Article 7.6 — Stateless and Unrepresented Persons

Stateless persons, recognised refugees, and populations under occupation or in territories not effectively represented by any GA member state are entitled to the full protection of Articles 7.1 and 7.2 in all WGB actions. The Secretariat shall designate a special representative for stateless and unrepresented persons, who shall have standing to bring Article 7.4 complaints on their behalf and shall report annually to the PA on their situation.

Article 8.1 — Cultural Sovereignty

Every people has the right to maintain, develop, transmit, and practise its language, culture, traditions, and religious beliefs. The WGB has no authority to require any people to abandon, modify, or subordinate their cultural or religious practices except as necessary to enforce Chapter 7. Culture, religion, tradition, or communal autonomy may never be invoked to justify denial of equal civil status, bodily autonomy, freedom of thought and belief, freedom from coercive conversion or apostasy punishment, forced marriage, gender subordination, caste exclusion, or identity-based exclusion from education, property, movement, political participation, or public office. Cultural and religious practices are protected by this article only to the extent they are consistent with Chapter 7.

Article 8.2 — Prohibition on Cultural Erasure

No WGB measure, enforcement action, or economic condition may be designed or foreseeably expected to destroy, suppress, or forcibly homogenise the cultural identity, language, or religious practice of any people. This applies to conditions attached to economic assistance under Chapter 9. The World Court may review any WGB measure alleged to violate this article on application by any affected state, group, or the PA.

Article 8.3 — Indigenous and Minority Peoples

Indigenous peoples and national, ethnic, linguistic, and religious minorities have the right to self-governance in internal affairs, to use their languages in education and administration, to practise their religions, and to maintain their relationship with their ancestral lands, subject always to Chapter 7. No minority self-governance arrangement may deny equal civil status, bodily autonomy, education, movement, or political participation to women, dissenters, converts, non-believers, lower-status groups, or sexual minorities. Member states must report annually to the WGB on the status of minority rights within their jurisdiction.

Article 8.4 — No Official World Religion or Ideology

The WGB shall have no official religion, philosophical doctrine, or political ideology. It shall treat all religious and non-religious worldviews with equal respect and shall not favour or disfavour any in its operations or policies.

Article 8.5 — Regional Governance Bodies

Regional governance bodies—whether pre-existing or newly formed—are recognised as intermediate governance layers. The WGB shall coordinate with, not supersede, such bodies where they exercise legitimate authority within their regions. Regional bodies may implement this law's requirements through regional mechanisms provided those mechanisms meet or exceed the law's minimum standards. Where a regional body seeks formal recognition under this article, it must apply to the GA, which may grant recognition by simple majority.

Article 9.1 — Scope and Rationale

Extreme economic disparity is a structural cause of conflict, rights violations, and instability. This chapter addresses that disparity through a voluntary coordination framework. Mandatory redistributive obligations are not created by this chapter. The WGB does not impose an economic model but facilitates voluntary cooperation.

Article 9.2 — World Development Fund

A World Development Fund (WDF) is established. Member states with per-capita GDP above 200% of the world median are invited to make annual contributions to the WDF on a pledge-and-review basis. Each eligible member state declares a voluntary contribution target; contributions and performance against targets are published annually. The GA may, by 2/3 supermajority, recommend a reference contribution level to serve as a benchmark, but this recommendation is not binding. The WDF disburses grants to states below 50% of the world median per-capita GDP for: basic health infrastructure, clean water, primary education, and climate adaptation. Disbursement decisions are made by a Board of which at least 50% are representatives of recipient-eligible states. WDF conditionality is limited to proper use of funds, transparency reporting, and compliance with this law's binding provisions under Chapters 5, 6, and 10.

Article 9.3 — Sovereign Debt Mediation

The WGB shall establish a Sovereign Debt Mediation Service (SDMS) that any member state may petition for facilitated negotiation of sovereign debts whose service costs demonstrably prevent the state from meeting its population's basic needs. The SDMS provides a neutral mediator and procedural framework; it does not issue binding restructuring terms. Creditor states and private creditors may voluntarily participate in SDMS proceedings. Any agreement reached through the SDMS is a voluntary contract between the parties and is enforced by the parties' own legal systems or by arbitration clauses they agree to. The WGB does not guarantee or enforce SDMS agreements.

Article 9.4 — Essential Medicines and Technology Access

Intellectual property regimes may not be used to deny access to medicines, vaccines, or technologies essential to preventing mass death. Where a patent holder refuses to license an essential medicine or technology at an affordable price during a health emergency declared under Chapter 16, the WGB may issue a compulsory licensing authorisation to any willing producer within the ratifying member states, with fair compensation to the patent holder determined by the World Court. This provision does not apply to non-member states.

Article 9.5 — Prohibition on WGB Economic Coercion

The WGB shall not use economic assistance, trade access, WDF grants, or SDMS services as instruments to coerce member states to adopt specific political systems, economic ideologies, or cultural practices. Conditionality attached to WDF grants is limited to proper use of the funds, transparency reporting, and compliance with this law's binding provisions. This prohibition applies equally to conditions recommended by WGB agencies or staff.

Article 10.1 — Global Commons

The high seas, the deep seabed, Antarctica, outer space, and the atmosphere are global commons held in trust for all present and future generations. No member state, corporation, or individual may claim sovereignty over, cause catastrophic harm to, or militarise these commons in violation of this law. The WGB is the trustee of last resort for global commons governance. This article does not disturb existing lawful resource-use arrangements under treaties such as UNCLOS that are consistent with this article; the WGB shall seek coordination agreements with relevant treaty bodies.

Article 10.2 — Climate Stability Obligations and Carbon-Budget Compliance

Member states collectively commit to a science-based global carbon budget consistent with minimising overshoot and preventing catastrophic cross-border climate harm. The WCA shall propose, and the GA and PA shall approve, rolling 5-year carbon-budget allocations and associated methane, land-use, and adaptation obligations for member states using published criteria that include historical emissions, current capacity, development need, and mitigation potential. Each member state must: (a) submit and implement a domestic compliance plan consistent with its allocation; (b) meet binding methane-control and land-use protection standards adopted under this chapter; (c) maintain adaptation measures for foreseeable cross-border climate harms where technically and economically feasible; and (d) submit to annual independent verification. Upon a final World Court finding of material and unjustified non-compliance, the automatic non-kinetic measures in Article 10.2A apply without need for SC recommendation. Temperature targets may be used as interpretive context but do not replace the binding carbon-budget and sectoral obligations of this article.

Article 10.2A — Automatic Climate Consequences

Upon a final World Court finding that a member state has materially and unjustifiably exceeded its approved carbon-budget allocation, failed to implement required methane or land-use controls, or caused substantial cross-border climate harm through non-compliance, the following consequences apply automatically: (a) climate-adjusted financial contributions to the Climate Adaptation Fund proportionate to the verified excess and the state's capacity to pay; (b) carbon-border and procurement adjustments by all member states against covered goods from the non-compliant state according to a schedule approved in advance by the GA and PA; (c) suspension of access to WGB climate-finance benefits other than emergency humanitarian adaptation support; and (d) mandatory publication of a compliance notice in all member states' customs and procurement systems. The SC has no role in blocking these measures. Humanitarian essentials are exempt.

Article 10.3 — World Climate Authority

A World Climate Authority (WCA) is established as a WGB specialised agency. Its powers are: (a) verifying national emissions, methane, land-use, and adaptation data through independent technical assessment; (b) proposing a global carbon budget updated every 5 years; (c) proposing binding national allocations and sectoral standards to the GA and PA for approval; (d) managing a Climate Adaptation Fund for vulnerable states, funded by voluntary contributions and a proportion of any financial consequences collected under Article 10.2A; and (e) certifying and publishing carbon market integrity. The WCA Board comprises climate scientists elected by peer-review process, member-state representatives elected by the GA, and representatives of climate-vulnerable peoples nominated by the PA. No single state holds more than 2 seats. WCA standards are subject to Article 12.3 rulemaking process.

Article 10.4 — Prohibition on Ecocide

Causing, authorising, or permitting widespread, severe, and irreversible harm to a natural ecosystem constitutes ecocide and is a violation of this law. States and corporations may be held responsible. Individual criminal liability for ecocide is enforceable in the World Court under Chapter 11. Harm is 'widespread' if it affects an area exceeding 500 km², extends across a transboundary ecosystem, or significantly impairs a global commons area; 'severe' if, on the balance of probabilities and based on published scientific criteria, it reduces the ecosystem's capacity for natural regeneration by at least 50% within a 30-year horizon; and 'irreversible' if it cannot be remediated to substantially equivalent ecological function within a 30-year horizon by available technology at reasonable cost. The WCA shall publish supplementary evidentiary guidelines.

Article 10.5 — Water and Air as Member-State Obligations

Access to a minimum of 50 litres of clean water per person per day and to air quality meeting WHO-equivalent standards is a fundamental human need that member states must work progressively to secure for their populations. Member states must not intentionally deprive their populations of these minimums and must not export or divert water resources in a manner that foreseeably reduces another member state's population below the 50-litre threshold. Progressive realisation applies: states must demonstrate measurable year-on-year improvement where the threshold is not currently met, subject to available resources and international cooperation. This article creates an obligation of conduct, not an immediately justiciable individual entitlement against the WGB; complaints about inter-state water diversion may be brought to the World Court's Inter-State Chamber.

Article 10.6 — Geoengineering Governance

No member state, corporation operating under member-state jurisdiction, or individual may deploy solar radiation management, large-scale ocean fertilisation, or stratospheric aerosol injection at a scale capable of affecting regional or global climate without prior authorisation from the WCA and the GA and PA by concurrent majority. Research below operational thresholds is permitted with WCA registration and monitoring. Non-member states are not bound by this article; the WGB shall pursue a multilateral geoengineering governance treaty through the UN system to address this gap.

Article 11.1 — Establishment

There is established a World Court as the sole judicial organ of the WGB. The World Court consists of four chambers: (a) the Inter-State Chamber; (b) the Criminal Chamber; (c) the Human Rights Chamber; and (d) the Administrative Chamber. Each chamber operates independently. The World Court's jurisdiction is defined by this law and does not extend to disputes outside its enumerated subject matter.

Article 11.2 — Composition and Selection

The World Court has 28 judges: 7 per chamber, with 4 judges from the shared pool who rotate across chambers on a schedule determined by the Court's rules. Judges are elected by concurrent vote of the GA and the PA from nominations submitted by member states and accredited transnational legal bodies on the basis of demonstrated legal expertise and independence. No two judges may be nationals of the same state. Judges serve single 9-year terms. The GA and PA must ensure regional, gender, and legal-tradition diversity on the bench. A judge who is a national of a state involved in proceedings before their chamber must recuse.

Article 11.3 — Inter-State Chamber

The Inter-State Chamber adjudicates disputes between member states arising under this law, including disputes over WGB authority, obligations expressly created by this law that refer to external treaty concepts, aggression claims under Chapter 3, inter-state water disputes under Article 10.5, and climate compliance disputes under Article 10.2. Member states accept compulsory jurisdiction for all Chapter 3, 5, 6, and 10 disputes as a condition of ratification. For other disputes, jurisdiction requires consent of both parties. The Chamber may order provisional measures pending final judgment where the applicant shows probable success on the merits and a substantial risk of irreparable harm.

Article 11.4 — Human Rights Chamber

The Human Rights Chamber adjudicates complaints by individuals, groups, stateless persons, or states alleging violation of Chapter 7 rights by a WGB organ or by a member state acting under this law. Individuals must exhaust domestic remedies or demonstrate their unavailability or ineffectiveness. The Chamber may order cessation of the violation, release of persons unlawfully detained, remediation, and compensation. Its orders are binding. The WGB legal aid fund under Article 7.4 is available to individual complainants.

Article 11.5 — Criminal Chamber

The Criminal Chamber has jurisdiction over natural persons accused of: (a) ordering or executing the use of WMD; (b) genocide and crimes against humanity as defined for the limited purposes incorporated by this law; (c) ecocide under Article 10.4; (d) systematic violation of Article 5.4 prohibitions; and (e) corruption of WGB processes under Article 15.6. Jurisdiction is complementary: the Chamber exercises jurisdiction only when the state with primary jurisdiction is unwilling or unable to prosecute, or when the act directly implicates WGB officers. The Chamber shall seek coordination with the International Criminal Court through the Article 0.4 coordination agreement to avoid parallel proceedings and double jeopardy. Accused persons have all rights enumerated in Article 7.1 and additionally: notice of charges, adequate time and resources to prepare a defence, assistance of counsel of their choice, trial before an impartial tribunal, right to examine witnesses, right to appeal, and prohibition on double jeopardy.

Article 11.6 — Administrative Chamber

The Administrative Chamber adjudicates challenges to WGB decisions, WAISA orders, WMDCA findings, WCA recommendations, and WDF disbursement decisions brought by member states, corporations, or individuals with direct legal interest. The Chamber may annul, vary, or confirm WGB decisions. It must issue reasoned judgments within 90 days, or within 14 days for emergency matters. It also reviews emergency declarations on PA request under Article 16.6.

Article 11.7 — Due Process Standards

All World Court proceedings must comply with: notice of proceedings to affected parties; right to present evidence and argument; right to an interpreter in any of the six official languages; access to a reasoned written judgment in all six official languages; right to appeal within the Court's chamber structure; and prohibition on trials in absentia for criminal cases unless the defendant has fled and been given adequate notice. Proceedings are presumptively public; in camera proceedings require a written judicial order stating specific grounds, subject to review.

Article 11.8 — Enforcement of Judgments

Member states must enforce World Court judgments in good faith. Non-compliance triggers the automatic Articles 4.9, 4.9A, 6.7, or 10.2A consequences as applicable within 120 days, or sooner where the relevant article so provides. Non-compliance by a member state is also automatically referred to the SC by the Court, which may authorise proportionate enforcement measures by member-state coalitions under time-limited, specific mandates. No enforcement measure may violate Chapter 7.

Article 12.1 — Specialised Agencies

The WGB operates through the following specialised agencies defined in this law: WAISA (Chapter 5), WMDCA (Chapter 6), WCA (Chapter 10), WDF (Chapter 9), and the Mediation Service (Chapter 3). Each agency operates under a founding charter consistent with this law. No agency may exceed the authority granted by its founding charter. Agency charters are published and subject to World Court Administrative Chamber review on application by any member state, PA, or affected person.

Article 12.2 — Staff and Independence

WGB and agency staff serve the WGB, not their states of nationality. They must declare conflicts of interest within 7 days of arising and recuse from matters affecting their national or personal financial interests. Staff selection is merit-based with regional diversity requirements. No single state's nationals may constitute more than 10% of professional staff at any agency. Staff are subject to a 3-year post-employment cooling-off period from regulated entities under Article 4.11(b).

Article 12.3 — Regulatory Process

Before any agency issues a binding standard, regulation, or order with general effect, it must: (a) publish a draft with explanatory note in all six official languages; (b) hold a public comment period of at minimum 60 days, or 30 days for emergency technical standards under Chapters 5 and 6; (c) respond in writing to all material comments; and (d) publish a final rule with statement of reasons, evidentiary basis, burden allocation, and any safe harbors. Emergency regulations may be issued immediately but expire in 90 days unless confirmed through this process. No agency may use guidance, FAQs, or informal advisories to impose de facto binding obligations not adopted under this article.

Article 12.4 — Prohibition on WGB Intelligence Services

The WGB shall not operate a general intelligence or surveillance service targeting individuals or domestic political activity of member states. WGB inspection and monitoring functions are limited to the specific authorities granted by this law. Any collection or analysis capability maintained by a WGB agency must be publicly chartered, technically bounded, judicially reviewable, and prohibited from clandestine human-source recruitment, covert action, or domestic political surveillance.

Article 12.4A — Verification and Analysis Limits

No WGB agency may rely on undisclosed intelligence-sharing arrangements as a substitute for its own lawful verification processes. Member states may voluntarily submit information to WAISA, WMDCA, or WCA, but any such submission must be logged in summary form in the transparency register, disclosed to the World Court if relied upon in any warrant or enforcement proceeding, and independently corroborated where practicable. The WGB may not direct or task member-state intelligence collection.

Article 12.5 — Prohibition on WGB Propaganda

The WGB shall not produce or fund content designed to influence domestic public opinion in member states on matters outside WGB jurisdiction. Public communications must be factual, attributed, and confined to WGB subject matter. Violations by WGB officers are subject to disciplinary proceedings before the Administrative Chamber.

Article 12.6 — Automatic Expiry of Coercive Agency Authorities

Coercive authority held by WAISA, WMDCA, and WCA—including emergency suspension, no-notice or warrant-based suspect-site inspection, mandatory telemetry, interoperability cutoff authority, and automatic climate-consequence administration—expires automatically every 8 years unless affirmatively renewed before expiry by: (a) a 3/5 vote of the GA; (b) a 3/5 vote of the PA; and (c) domestic ratification by at least one-half of member states. If renewal fails, the authority in question is suspended until renewed under this article. Renewal may not be bundled with unrelated amendments.

Article 13.1 — Proposal

New chapters, articles, or amendments to this law may be proposed by: (a) any 10 member states acting jointly; (b) the GA by simple majority; (c) the SC; (d) the PA by simple majority; (e) the Secretariat with a 2/3 Board endorsement; or (f) the re-audit commission under Article 17.3. Proposals must include a statement of purpose, a summary of the specific change, an analysis of impact on subsidiarity and rights, an indication of the enforcement mechanism, and a statement whether the proposal expands, narrows, or renews coercive authority.

Article 13.2 — Adoption

Adoption of a new chapter or substantive amendment requires: (a) review by the Administrative Chamber for consistency with existing law in an advisory opinion within 60 days; (b) at least 90 days of public consultation; (c) GA approval by a 2/3 supermajority of member states representing 2/3 of weighted population under Article 4.2A; and (d) PA approval by a 3/5 majority. Amendments that expand coercive authority, expand the scope of Chapters 5, 6, 10, 12, 16, or alter Chapters 1, 7, 13, 15, 17, or 18 require additionally ratification by at least one-half of member states through their domestic legislative or constitutional processes. Amendments that narrow or repeal coercive authority shall not require a higher threshold than amendments that expand it.

Article 13.3 — Ratification Council

A Ratification Council consisting of one senior official per member state certifies that ratification thresholds have been met. It has no other function. Its certification is subject to World Court review for procedural accuracy.

Article 13.4 — Effective Date

A new or amended provision enters into force 180 days after the date of adoption and completion of any required domestic ratification, unless the provision specifies a longer implementation period. Emergency measures under Chapter 16 take effect on the date of concurrent vote. No foundational amendment—defined as any change to Chapters 1, 7, 13, 15, 17, or 18—may take effect in fewer than 180 days.

Article 14.1 — Permitted Uses of AI in Adjudication

AI tools may be used in WGB and World Court proceedings for document analysis and summarisation, translation, identification of precedent, and administrative case management. AI tools may not issue binding legal determinations, replace judicial deliberation, or operate without disclosure to all parties in a proceeding.

Article 14.2 — Disclosure Obligation

Any party, judge, or agency that uses an AI tool in the preparation of a legal submission, adjudicative document, or regulatory order must disclose the name and version of the system, the nature of its use, and any known limitations. This disclosure is part of the public record in all six official languages.

Article 14.3 — AI-Assisted Compliance Monitoring

WAISA, WMDCA, and WCA may use AI systems for monitoring, pattern detection, and preliminary violation flagging. Any AI-flagged potential violation must be reviewed by at minimum two human analysts before being elevated to a formal notice of investigation. AI flagging alone is not a basis for sanctions.

Article 14.4 — Prohibition on AI as Decision-Maker in Rights Cases

No AI system may issue, confirm, or effectively determine an outcome in any proceeding that affects a person's rights under Chapter 7, including detention, sanctions, asset freezes, or deprivation of access to services. Human decision-makers must exercise independent judgment in such proceedings, documented in writing.

Article 14.5 — AI System Audit in Adjudication

AI tools used in World Court or WGB adjudicative contexts must be audited annually by an independent technical body appointed by WAISA. Audit results are public. Any tool found to exhibit systematic bias, opacity, or unreliability must be suspended from adjudicative use until remediated and re-audited.

Article 14.6 — Right to Explanation

Any person who has been subject to an investigation, enforcement action, or adverse determination in which AI tools were used has the right to request a plain-language explanation of how those tools contributed to the outcome, and to challenge the accuracy or fairness of that contribution before the Administrative Chamber. The explanation must address the specific factors, records, or analytical steps that materially influenced the output relevant to that person's case, not merely describe the system's general operation.

Article 15.1 — Express Prohibition on World Sovereignty

The WGB is not a sovereign state and shall not claim sovereignty over any territory, population, or resource. Its authority derives exclusively from this law and from the consent of ratifying member states. It may not acquire territory or claim nationality over any person. Population data used for Article 4.2A calculations is sourced from the UN Population Division; the WGB has no independent census authority.

Article 15.2 — No Inherent Powers

The WGB possesses no inherent or implied powers. Any action not expressly authorised by a specific article of this law is ultra vires and void. The World Court shall strike down such actions. This includes actions rationalised as necessary to achieve the law's purposes if no specific article grants the authority.

Article 15.3 — Prohibition on World Police

The WGB shall not establish a standing police force, prison system, or coercive security apparatus. Enforcement of World Court judgments and SC resolutions is carried out by member states voluntarily or by SC-authorised coalitions under time-limited, specific mandates, except for non-force civil protection and sanctions-enforcement capacities pre-committed under Article 4.9B.

Article 15.4 — Exit Right

Any member state may withdraw from this law by: (a) a domestic legislative or constitutional vote satisfying its own highest domestic requirements; (b) written notice to the Secretariat; and (c) a 3-year withdrawal period during which the state remains bound. Withdrawal does not release a state from liability for violations committed while a member. Any World Court proceeding initiated before the withdrawal period ends remains within the Court's jurisdiction to final judgment. If a state has ratified, committed a material violation of Chapters 5 or 6, and gives notice of withdrawal, then for those chapters only: (i) the withdrawal period is extended to 5 years; (ii) all inspection, telemetry, and monitoring obligations already lawfully imposed remain in force until the World Court certifies that the violation has ceased and relevant materials, systems, or programmes are no longer under the state's control; and (iii) member states shall continue to apply Article 4.9A measures after formal withdrawal for so long as the Court's certification has not issued. No financial penalty or armed response may be imposed solely for the act of withdrawal.

Article 15.5 — Sunset of Individual Chapters

Chapters 5, 6, and 10 expire automatically every 10 years unless renewed before expiry by: (a) a 3/5 vote of the GA; (b) a 3/5 vote of the PA; and (c) domestic ratification by at least one-half of member states. Additionally, any chapter may be subjected to a devolution or sunset vote if 1/3 of member states or 1/3 of the PA petition; such a vote requires the same threshold as would be required to renew that chapter. If renewal fails, the chapter expires 2 years after the vote, except that pending cases and already-triggered enforcement measures continue only as necessary to prevent immediate catastrophic harm and for no longer than 18 months absent fresh legal basis.

Article 15.6 — Anti-Entrenchment

No WGB organ, agency, or officer may take any action designed to make this law more difficult to amend, repeal, sunset, or devolve than the procedures set out in Chapters 13, 17, and 18 allow. Attempts to manipulate the ratification process, intimidate member-state representatives, corrupt the GA or PA vote, tamper with the transparency register, or bundle unrelated measures with renewal votes are offences subject to the Criminal Chamber's jurisdiction under Article 11.5(e).

Article 15.7 — Prohibition on WGB Control of Domestic Courts

The WGB shall not direct, supervise, or override domestic court judgments except through the World Court's specific, enumerated jurisdiction. Domestic judges are not officers of the WGB. Domestic courts applying domestic law in domestic cases are entirely outside WGB authority except where Article 0.5 makes this law supreme within its narrow enumerated domains.

Article 15.8 — Prohibition on Mandatory Ideology

The WGB shall not require member states to adopt any particular political system, economic doctrine, educational curriculum, or social organisation as a condition of membership or compliance. Conditionality is limited to the specific obligations stated in this law.

Article 16.1 — Conditions for World Emergency Declaration

A World Emergency may be declared only by concurrent vote of the SC, the GA, and the PA and only in response to: (a) an imminent or ongoing use of WMD; (b) a catastrophic pandemic threatening millions of lives and requiring cross-border coordination beyond existing treaty mechanisms; (c) an imminent climate tipping-point event requiring immediate coordinated action evidenced by WCA technical assessment; or (d) an AI system posing an immediate existential threat under Article 5.7. No other event qualifies.

Article 16.2 — Duration and Renewal

A World Emergency declaration is valid for 90 days. Renewal requires a new concurrent vote of SC, GA, and PA. No emergency may be in force for more than 1 year in any 5-year period without a new ratification by 2/3 of member states. Cumulative abuse of emergency provisions is reviewable by the World Court on application by any member state or the PA.

Article 16.3 — Emergency Powers Available

During a World Emergency the WGB may: (a) direct member-state compliance with specific, narrowly defined containment or response measures that are publicly catalogued in advance in a standing Emergency Powers Schedule published by the Secretariat and approved annually by the GA and PA; (b) access the Climate Adaptation Fund and WDF without normal disbursement review cycles, subject to post-emergency audit; (c) grant WAISA emergency suspension authority under Article 5.7; (d) activate WMDCA rapid response inspections; and (e) activate pre-committed non-force civil protection capacities under Article 4.9B. If the Emergency Powers Schedule is outdated or incomplete for a novel crisis, only those emergency measures expressly authorised elsewhere in this law may be used until the Schedule is updated through emergency concurrent vote of the GA and PA and review by the Administrative Chamber within 7 days.

Article 16.4 — Rights During Emergency

A World Emergency does not suspend any provision of Chapter 7. The non-derogable rights floor remains fully in force during all emergencies. The World Court retains full jurisdiction during emergencies and must give priority to rights complaints, which must be heard within 14 days of filing during an active emergency.

Article 16.5 — Mandatory Post-Emergency Review

Within 180 days after a World Emergency ends, the GA and PA must conduct a joint public review of all measures taken, their effectiveness, and any rights impacts. The Administrative Chamber must audit any measure on its own initiative within the same period. Results are published in all six official languages.

Article 16.6 — Independent Review of Emergency Declarations

Within 7 days of any World Emergency declaration, the Administrative Chamber must conduct an independent review of whether the factual conditions for declaration are met, on application by any member state, the PA, or any 5 PA members. If the Chamber finds the conditions unmet, the declaration is suspended pending a new concurrent vote.

Article 17.1 — Mandatory 10-Year Re-Audit

This law is subject to a mandatory comprehensive re-audit every 10 years from the date of initial entry into force. The re-audit is conducted by an independent commission of 30 persons selected as follows: 10 appointed by the GA, 10 elected by an open global civil-society process under anti-front-group rules adopted in advance by the Administrative Chamber, and 10 selected by lot from a pool of credentialled legal, scientific, and ethics experts nominated by accredited universities and research institutions meeting published independence criteria. No member of the commission may be a sitting WGB officer, government minister, or employee of an entity regulated under Chapters 5 or 6 within the preceding 5 years.

Article 17.2 — Scope of Re-Audit

The re-audit commission must assess: (a) whether the enumerated powers remain appropriately scoped; (b) whether new catastrophic-risk domains should be added or removed; (c) whether the rights floor requires updating; (d) whether any WGB organ or agency has accumulated authority beyond its mandate; (e) whether the balance between world-level and member-state authority remains appropriate; (f) the adequacy of sunset, devolution, and exit provisions; (g) whether the law's treatment of non-ratifying states and non-state actors remains adequate; and (h) whether a world constitutional convention is warranted before v1.0.

Article 17.3 — Re-Audit Report and Binding Effect

The commission's report is published in full in all six official languages within 2 years of commencement. Recommendations supported by 2/3 of commission members are automatically submitted to the GA and PA as formal proposals under Article 13.1 without requiring state co-sponsorship. The GA and PA must each vote on every such proposal within 12 months of submission.

Article 17.4 — Technology-Triggered Re-Audit

In addition to the decennial cycle, a partial re-audit of Chapters 5 and 6 is triggered automatically if: (a) WAISA's standing technical panel issues an alert under Article 5.9 that AI capabilities have advanced materially beyond current thresholds; or (b) new weapons technologies emerge that are not covered by Chapter 6. The partial re-audit must be completed within 9 months of the trigger event.

Article 18.1 — Repeal of Individual Articles

Any article of this law except those in Chapter 7 designated non-derogable and Article 15.4 (exit right) may be repealed by the same threshold required to adopt an amendment of equivalent scope under Article 13.2, subject to a 90-day notice period and Administrative Chamber review for consistency. Repeal or narrowing of coercive authority shall not require a higher threshold than expansion or renewal of that authority.

Article 18.1A — Citizen and Assembly Devolution Trigger

A devolution or repeal review of any coercive authority, agency power, or catastrophic-risk chapter must be initiated if either: (a) one-third of the PA so votes; or (b) verified citizen petitions from at least 3% of the adult population across at least one-third of member states are submitted under procedures certified by the Administrative Chamber. Upon a valid trigger, the GA and PA must hold a renewal or repeal vote within 12 months.

Article 18.2 — Repeal of Non-Derogable Rights

Articles in Chapter 7 designated non-derogable may not be repealed or weakened. Any purported repeal or amendment that would reduce the non-derogable rights floor is void ab initio and the World Court must so declare. Amendments to Article 7.1 that expand the non-derogable floor are permitted and require the same procedure as Article 13.2 amendments to Chapter 7.

Article 18.3 — Full Repeal of This Law

This law as a whole may be repealed by: (a) GA approval by a 2/3 supermajority of member states representing 2/3 of weighted population under Article 4.2A; (b) PA approval by a 3/5 majority; (c) ratification of the repeal by at least one-half of member states through their domestic processes; and (d) a transition period of up to 5 years during which successor arrangements may be put in place for each of this law's functions, particularly for WMD control and AI oversight. Full repeal does not release obligations arising from past violations. The transition period may be shortened by the same bodies that approved repeal.

Article 18.4 — Judicial Invalidation

The World Court may invalidate specific WGB decisions, regulations, or orders that are ultra vires or contrary to this law. Judicial invalidation of a specific act does not repeal the underlying article. The Court may not invalidate articles of this law themselves except as provided in Article 18.2.

Article 18.5 — Suspension of a Member State

A member state that materially and persistently violates this law and refuses to comply with World Court remediation orders may be suspended from GA and PA voting rights by operation of Article 4.9 or, where additional suspension is sought, by a 3/5 GA vote confirmed by a 3/5 PA vote. Suspension does not remove the member state's treaty obligations or the rights of its citizens under Chapter 7. Suspension may be lifted by simple GA and PA majority upon World Court certification of demonstrated compliance. Suspended states' populations retain full standing before the Human Rights Chamber.

Article 18.6 — Severability

If any article or provision of this law is held invalid, the remainder of the law continues in full force. The World Court shall interpret the law to preserve the greatest possible effect of the remaining provisions consistent with the preamble and the enumerated-powers principle.

• Narrow supremacy clause only for catastrophic-risk and rights domains, preventing domestic law from shielding violations while avoiding general world-law supremacy.
• Symmetric anti-entrenchment architecture: coercive powers and Chapters 5, 6, and 10 expire automatically unless renewed by concurrent GA and PA supermajorities plus domestic ratification by a substantial fraction of member states.
• Repeal and devolution are no harder than expansion; citizen and PA triggers can force renewal or repeal votes on coercive powers.
• Automatic non-kinetic enforcement ladder under Article 4.9A applies through member-state obligations to member and non-member violators alike after judicial findings.
• Pre-committed civil protection, sanctions-enforcement, evacuation, cyber-defence, and interdiction capacities reduce dependence on ad hoc coalition politics for non-force response.
• Atrocity and WMD cases now trigger automatic interim non-kinetic measures pending full review, reducing paralysis in fast-moving crises.
• AI governance rewritten as full-stack regulation covering developers, cloud providers, chip manufacturers, brokers, model hosts, API gateways, fine-tuning platforms, synthetic-data services, downstream integrators, and deployers.
• Real-time or near-real-time telemetry, frontier-cluster licensing, 6-hour incident reporting, and strict liability for prohibited open release replace unrealistic post-release recall assumptions.
• WAISA major standards require simplified GA and PA approval, reducing quasi-legislative agency drift while preserving technical responsiveness.
• Freedom of thought, conscience, belief, equal civil status, and bodily autonomy are elevated into the non-derogable core; strict bans on coercive conversion, apostasy punishment, gender subordination, and identity-based exclusion close cultural-authoritarian loopholes.
• Strongly protected liberty rights in Article 7.2 are subject to strict scrutiny, not broad proportionality balancing.
• People's Assembly legitimacy improved through minimum electoral standards, independent election review, vacant-seat consequence for sham elections, and modestly expanded powers.
• GA and PA representation now use transparent degressive proportionality rather than an arbitrary population cap.
• Climate chapter now uses binding carbon-budget allocations, methane and land-use controls, adaptation duties, and automatic consequences after final World Court findings.
• SC cannot block automatic economic and technological consequences where this law expressly provides them; its role is limited to kinetic enforcement.
• General intelligence-service loophole closed: no undisclosed liaison substitute; only publicly chartered, judicially reviewable verification and analysis functions are permitted.
• Definitions tightened with evidentiary thresholds, burden allocations, safe harbors, and explicit limits on agency use of guidance to create de facto law.
• External treaty concepts are incorporated only for expressly stated purposes, reducing jurisdictional ambiguity.
• Exit right preserved but hardened: states withdrawing after material AI or WMD violations remain under monitoring obligations and member-state countermeasures until judicial certification of cessation.
• 20-year WGB sunset now expires automatically unless renewed by GA, PA, and domestic ratification.