Tribunal Constitution
The Soteria Private Arbitration Tribunal ("SPAT") — Governance, Tiers, and Procedural Authority
Effective Date: Dureth, Clavis 19, Year 1 of the Root (Soterian Calendar) Gregorian Reference: February 10, 2026 Last Amended: Luxen, Luminis 14, Year 1 of the Root — March 4, 2026 Version: 1.1 Authority: Soteria Covenant Trust
Preamble
This document defines the constitutional framework of the Soteria Private Arbitration Tribunal ("SPAT") — the first tribunal in human history to codify complete procedural transparency, true impartiality, and immutable accountability into its operating system.
SPAT is not an organ of any state. It derives its authority from the voluntary covenant between its members and the trust that governs them. Every proceeding is recorded. Every decision is signed. Every action is anchored to an immutable ledger. There are no back rooms, no sealed deals, no single person who can override the collective voice of a panel.
SPAT adjudicates disputes according to the Doctrine of Equity — a body of binding principles comprising the classical maxims of equity and SPAT-specific doctrinal principles. Where procedural rules are silent, equity speaks. Where rules produce injustice, equity intervenes. The full Doctrine is published separately and has constitutional force.
Founding Principles:
- No single person renders judgment. Panels decide. Always.
- The administrative function is separated from the judicial function. Those who assign cases do not decide them.
- Advocates cannot judge. Judges cannot advocate. Role separation is absolute.
- Transparency is a first-class function. Every non-sealed proceeding is visible to Observers.
- Appeals go to a different panel. Never the same people who decided.
- The audit trail is the constitution. GPG-signed, OTS-anchored, immutable.
- Action over inaction. In emergencies, one honest Arbiter acting in good faith is better than no action at all. The review mechanism exists to catch errors, not to prevent action.
Part I: Tribunal Tiers
Overview
The Tribunal operates with a 5-tier system (Tiers 0-4) plus external claimants. Each tier has specific capabilities, restrictions, and responsibilities. Capabilities are not cumulative — each tier has a distinct function. An Arbiter does not "also" act as an Advocate; they are separate roles with separate obligations.
All persons interacting with the Tribunal must register, regardless of whether they are external or Soteria Covenant members. Covenant membership authenticates identity and may inform the application, but does not bypass the application process.
External Claimant (No Tier — Registered User)
Purpose: Any natural person or entity with a grievance to bring before the Tribunal.
Registration: Name, email, password. Immediate access upon registration.
Capabilities: - File a grievance - Track their case(s) - Submit evidence for cases where they are a party - Respond to correspondence and tribunal notices - Accept or reject reconciliation offers - File an appeal (as a losing party) - Retain an Advocate (with documented engagement agreement)
Restrictions: - Cannot view cases where they are not a party - Cannot represent anyone other than themselves - Cannot access any staff, administrative, or deliberative functions
Dashboard: My Cases — case status, deadlines, correspondence, documents.
Tier 0 — Observer
Purpose: The eyes of the community. Public accountability through witness.
Registration: Application form — agree to Observer Code of Conduct. Auto-approved for any registered user or Covenant member.
Capabilities: - View all public (non-sealed) case proceedings - Read published judgments and orders - Attend hearings in a view-only capacity - View tribunal statistics and performance metrics - Submit amicus briefs (friend-of-the-tribunal, if permitted by the presiding Arbiter)
Restrictions: - Cannot file grievances (must register as Claimant separately) - Cannot represent any party - Cannot participate in deliberation - Cannot vote or influence decisions - Cannot access sealed or confidential case materials - Cannot access internal staff communications
Dashboard: Public case feed, published judgments, tribunal statistics, hearing calendar.
Tier 1 — Advocate
Purpose: Counsel. Stands beside parties, not above them. Their client's cause is their cause.
Registration: Full application required: - Qualifications and relevant experience - Jurisdiction(s) of expertise - Whether they offer pro bono services - Agreement to the Advocate Code of Conduct - Requires approval by the Chief Arbiter before activation
Covenant members with existing Tribunal Tier 1 appointment still complete this application. The existing appointment may expedite review but does not bypass it.
Capabilities: - Everything an Observer can do (view public proceedings) - File grievances on behalf of a client (with engagement agreement) - Represent a party throughout all proceedings (G through R_RECONCILIATION) - Submit evidence and arguments on behalf of their client - Negotiate during Mediation (M stage) on their client's behalf - Access their client's case materials (for cases where engagement is active) - Communicate with the Tribunal on behalf of their client - Accept/reject reconciliation offers on client's behalf (with client's documented authorization)
Restrictions: - Cannot sit on any panel - Cannot vote on any case - Cannot issue any orders - Cannot access cases where they have no active engagement - Cannot represent both sides of the same case - Cannot serve as Advocate AND Panelist simultaneously on any case - Cannot represent a party in a case involving another party they currently or previously represented in an adverse capacity (conflict of interest)
Fee Structure:
| Fee Type | Description | Rules |
|---|---|---|
PRO_BONO |
Advocate volunteers their time — no fee | No restrictions |
FIXED_FEE |
Agreed flat amount | Disclosed upfront, claimant agrees before engagement |
PERCENTAGE |
Percentage of recovery | Maximum cap: 25%. Disclosed upfront. Only applies if recovery is obtained. |
Hourly billing is prohibited. The Tribunal does not recognize, enforce, or permit hourly fee arrangements. Hourly billing creates a perverse incentive to prolong proceedings — the antithesis of justice.
Engagement Agreement (required per client per case):
| Field | Description |
|---|---|
| Advocate | The Advocate (Tier 1 user) |
| Party | The Claimant or Respondent they represent |
| Case | The case (may be null if pre-filing) |
| Fee Type | PRO_BONO, FIXED_FEE, or PERCENTAGE |
| Fee Amount | Amount or percentage |
| Fee Cap | Maximum fee (mandatory for PERCENTAGE) |
| Client Agreement | Must be TRUE before Advocate can act — documented consent |
| Agreement Timestamp | When the client agreed |
| Agreement Hash | SHA-256 of the engagement terms (immutable record) |
The Tribunal records the engagement agreement as part of the audit trail. The fee arrangement is between the Advocate and their client. The Tribunal does not enforce payment between them but maintains the record for transparency and dispute resolution.
Dashboard: Client cases, filing tools, engagement management, correspondence, mediation workspace.
Tier 2 — Panelist
Purpose: The collective voice. No one decides alone. The Panelist is the foundation of the Tribunal's deliberative process.
Registration: Full application required: - Qualifications and relevant experience - Jurisdiction(s) of expertise - Statement of impartiality - Agreement to the Panelist Code of Conduct - Active GPG key required (for signing votes and deliberations) - Good Standing required (Covenant members must be in Good Standing) - Requires approval by the Chief Arbiter before activation
Capabilities: - Everything an Observer can do (view public proceedings) - Be assigned to case panels by the Chief Arbiter - Review all evidence for cases where they are assigned - Vote on panel decisions (equal vote — no weighted votes) - Participate in panel deliberation - Draft findings of fact (collaborative, within the panel) - File dissenting opinions (recorded as part of the public case record) - Flag conflicts of interest and request recusal - Challenge unreviewed emergency orders (within 30-day window)
Restrictions: - Cannot act alone on any case — always part of a panel - Cannot preside over a panel (that is the Arbiter's role) - Cannot issue orders of any kind - Cannot set or extend deadlines - Cannot assign cases to anyone - Cannot override another panel's decision - Cannot access cases where they are not assigned
Dashboard: Assigned cases, evidence review workspace, voting interface, deliberation workspace, dissent drafting.
Tier 3 — Arbiter
Purpose: The presiding officer. Manages the hearing, ensures due process, leads the panel to a decision. Presides with integrity — the process is sacred.
Registration: Full application required: - All Panelist requirements plus: - Demonstrated experience (prior service as Panelist, or equivalent external experience) - Statement of judicial philosophy - Active GPG key required - Good Standing required - Requires approval by the Chief Arbiter before activation
Capabilities: - Everything an Observer can do (view public proceedings) - Everything a Panelist can do (vote, deliberate, dissent) - Lead and preside over panels - Issue interim and procedural orders (evidence rulings, scheduling, etc.) - Set and extend deadlines (within protocol limits) - Manage hearing flow (open/close evidence, call for submissions, manage testimony) - Rule on evidence admissibility - Handle FAST track cases (solo + 1 confirming Panelist) - Handle EMERGENCY track cases (solo, subject to panel review within 7 days) - Draft and issue judgment documents (after panel vote) - Cast tiebreaker vote when panel is deadlocked - Accept or reject reconciliation offers at the R_RECONCILIATION stage - Sign formal tribunal documents (GPG-signed) - Issue Public Service Instructions (PSI)
Restrictions: - Cannot override a panel's majority vote — the Arbiter's vote is equal to a Panelist's, except as tiebreaker - Cannot assign cases (that is the Chief Arbiter's function) - Cannot access the administrative dashboard - Cannot manage tribunal staff or operations - Cannot remove another Arbiter from a case - Cannot sit on an appeal panel for a case they originally presided over
FAST Track Authority: For default judgments (respondent did not acknowledge), the Arbiter reviews the case and issues a default judgment. One (1) confirming Panelist must agree that the default is proper. If the Panelist objects, the case is bumped to FULL track.
EMERGENCY Authority: In cases of imminent harm, the Arbiter can issue an emergency interim order acting solo. This order has full force immediately. See Part III: Emergency Protocol for the complete review process.
Dashboard: Presiding cases, docket management, order drafting, deadline tracker, judgment drafting workspace, evidence management.
Tier 4 — Chief Arbiter
Purpose: Servant of the process, not its master. The Chief Arbiter ensures the Tribunal functions — they do not decide individual cases.
Registration: Full application required: - All Arbiter requirements plus: - Demonstrated leadership and administrative experience - Vision statement for tribunal operations - Active GPG key required - Good Standing required - Requires approval by existing Chief Arbiter(s) or the Trust
Capabilities: - Everything an Arbiter can do (preside, issue orders, handle emergency) - Assign cases to panels and Arbiters (with documented reasoning for panel size) - Set panel size based on case severity (see Part II: Panel Composition) - Manage tribunal staff (activate, deactivate, set caseloads) - View all cases and all assignments across the Tribunal - Remand cases for re-hearing by a new panel (cannot override — only send back) - Review appeal validity and assign appeal panels (different from original panel) - Set tribunal-wide policy and procedures - Generate tribunal performance reports - Handle inter-panel conflicts and recusal disputes - Appoint Advocates for parties who lack representation - Manage the unassigned case pool - Recruit and onboard new Panelists when the Tribunal is understaffed
Restrictions: - CANNOT override any panel's substantive decision — this is absolute - CANNOT substitute their own judgment for a panel's — remand is the only remedy - CANNOT sit on a panel they assigned — separation of administrative and judicial functions - Cannot unilaterally modify a published judgment - Cannot seal or unseal cases without documented cause and audit trail - Cannot remove a sitting Arbiter mid-case except for documented cause (conflict of interest, misconduct, incapacity)
Remand Authority: The Chief Arbiter can send a case back to be re-heard. This means: - A new panel is formed (no overlap with the original panel) - The Chief Arbiter writes remand instructions: "The panel should reconsider X" or "The panel failed to address Y" - The new panel is not bound by the original decision — they hear the case fresh - The Chief Arbiter cannot write: "The judgment should be Z" — that would be substituting their judgment
Dashboard: Full administrative view — case assignment, workload management, staff management, tribunal statistics, policy management, all case access.
Case Classification and Numbering
Case Types
Every case filed before SPAT is classified by type, reflecting the nature of the dispute. The type code is embedded in the case reference number.
| Code | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|
| CIV | Civil | General civil disputes, contract disagreements, property matters |
| CRI | Criminal | Conduct violations, fraud, theft, assault, grave offenses |
| FID | Fiduciary | Breach of trust, trustee misconduct, fiduciary duty violations |
| ECO | Economic | Financial disputes, debts, commercial disagreements |
| GEN | General | Matters not fitting a specific category |
| FRD | Fraud | Deception, misrepresentation, fraudulent schemes |
| ADM | Administrative | Internal governance, procedural disputes, tribunal operations |
| EMR | Emergency | Matters requiring immediate relief under the Emergency Protocol |
| INT | International | Cross-border disputes, multi-jurisdictional matters |
| TRT | Trust | Trust instrument disputes, settlor/beneficiary disagreements |
| PMA | PMA | Private Membership Association disputes |
| TAX | Tax | Tax obligations, assessments, sovereign accounting matters |
| REG | Regulatory | Compliance, regulatory framework disputes |
| LAB | Labor | Employment, labor relations, wrongful termination |
| PRO | Property | Real property, intellectual property, asset disputes |
| FAM | Family | Family trust matters, domestic arrangements |
| IMM | Immigration | Status, membership, jurisdictional residency matters |
| ENV | Environmental | Environmental harm, resource disputes |
| MED | Medical | Medical malpractice, health-related disputes |
| TEC | Technology | Technology disputes, digital assets, cybersecurity |
Case Reference Numbers
Each case receives a unique reference number in the format:
TRB-{TYPE}-{YEAR}-{NNNN}
Examples:
- TRB-CIV-2026-0001 — First civil case of 2026
- TRB-CRI-2026-0042 — Criminal case #42 of 2026
- TRB-EMR-2026-0003 — Third emergency case of 2026
The sequence number (NNNN) is assigned automatically per type per year. Case references are permanent and immutable once assigned.
Part II: Panel Composition
Severity Classification
The Chief Arbiter classifies each case by severity at assignment time. This determines the required panel size.
| Severity | Triggers | Minimum Panel | Standard Panel | Maximum Panel |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Minor | Simple debt, small claims, single-issue disputes | 3 (1A + 2P) | 3 (1A + 2P) | 5 (1A + 4P) |
| Standard | Contract disputes, multi-issue claims, moderate amounts | 3 (1A + 2P) | 5 (1A + 4P) | 7 (1A + 6P) |
| Grave | Grave crimes, Tier 3 Lex Nigra matters, large claims, multi-party | 5 (1A + 4P) | 7 (1A + 6P) | 9 (1A + 8P) |
(A = Arbiter, P = Panelist. All panel sizes are odd numbers to prevent deadlock.)
Special Tracks
| Track | Panel Composition | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| FAST (default judgment) | 1 Arbiter + 1 confirming Panelist = 2 | Respondent forfeited participation. Both must agree default is proper. |
| EMERGENCY (interim relief) | 1 Arbiter (solo) | Full force immediately. Panel review within 7 days. See Part III. |
Panel Size Determination
The Chief Arbiter must document their reasoning for the panel size chosen in the case assignment record. Factors include:
- Judgment type: DEBT (usually Minor), CONTRACT_DISHONOR (usually Standard), GRAVE_CRIME (always Grave)
- Claim amount: Higher amounts warrant larger panels
- Number of parties: Multi-party disputes warrant larger panels
- Complexity: Novel issues, cross-jurisdictional matters, or cases with significant precedential value
- Lex Nigra tier sought: Any case seeking a Tier 3 (HARD_BLOCK) entry is automatically classified as Grave
If a party believes the panel is too small for the gravity of the case, they may petition the Chief Arbiter for panel enlargement. The Chief Arbiter's decision on panel size is documented and part of the case record.
Decision Rules
| Panel Size | Majority Required | Tiebreaker |
|---|---|---|
| 2 (FAST track) | Both must agree (unanimous) | If disagreement → bumps to FULL track |
| 3 | 2 of 3 | Arbiter breaks tie |
| 5 | 3 of 5 | Arbiter breaks tie |
| 7 | 4 of 7 | Arbiter breaks tie |
| 9 | 5 of 9 | Arbiter breaks tie |
The Arbiter's vote counts the same as a Panelist's vote in all cases. The tiebreaker applies only in a true deadlock (which can only occur if a panel member abstains or is recused, reducing the panel to an even number).
Quorum
A panel has quorum when at least the minimum panel size for the case severity is present and voting. If a panel member is recused or incapacitated: - If quorum is maintained → proceed - If quorum is lost → Chief Arbiter assigns a replacement before proceeding - Proceedings are paused until quorum is restored
Dissenting Opinions
Any panel member who votes in the minority may file a dissenting opinion. Dissenting opinions are: - Part of the public case record - GPG-signed by the dissenting member - Published alongside the majority judgment - A cornerstone of transparency — disagreement is not hidden, it is honored
Part III: Emergency Protocol
Principle
In the face of genocide, immediate harm, or destruction — one honest Arbiter acting in good faith is better than no action at all. The review mechanism exists to catch errors, not to prevent action.
Emergency Track Flow
EMERGENCY FILED (imminent harm alleged)
│
├─ STAGE 1: Immediate Action (24-48 hours)
│ └─ 1 Arbiter reviews the emergency filing
│ ├─ Issues emergency interim order (solo authority)
│ ├─ Order has FULL FORCE immediately
│ ├─ Order is GPG-signed and OTS-anchored
│ └─ All parties notified immediately
│
├─ STAGE 2: Panel Review Window (7 days)
│ ├─ IF panel available:
│ │ ├─ Panel convenes (1 Arbiter + 2 Panelists minimum)
│ │ ├─ The issuing Arbiter may preside (they know the case)
│ │ ├─ Panel reviews: AFFIRM, MODIFY, or VACATE the order
│ │ └─ Decision is GPG-signed by all panel members
│ │
│ └─ IF no panel available within 7 days:
│ ├─ Emergency order STANDS with full force
│ ├─ Case flagged as "UNREVIEWED EMERGENCY" in system
│ ├─ Chief Arbiter notified — urgent panel recruitment
│ └─ 30-day challenge window opens (see Stage 3)
│
└─ STAGE 3: Challenge Period (if unreviewed)
├─ Any Panelist (Tier 2+) can file a formal challenge
│ ├─ Challenge triggers mandatory panel formation within 14 days
│ └─ Panel reviews as in Stage 2
│
├─ Any affected party can also challenge the emergency order
│
└─ IF no challenge filed within 30 days:
└─ Emergency order becomes FINAL
└─ Case transitions to normal flow (F → A_ENFORCEMENT → R_RECONCILIATION)
Arbiter Accountability for Emergency Actions
Emergency authority is a profound responsibility. Safeguards against abuse:
-
Full audit trail: Every emergency order is GPG-signed, timestamped, and OTS-anchored. There is no way to issue an emergency order without a permanent, verifiable record.
-
Mandatory review: The 7-day panel review is not optional — it is deferred only when a panel cannot be formed.
-
Conduct review: If the review panel finds the emergency order was:
- Frivolous (no genuine emergency existed) → Arbiter receives a formal warning, recorded in their file
- Malicious (issued in bad faith, for personal gain, or to harm a party) → Arbiter is suspended pending full conduct review. If misconduct is confirmed, the Arbiter is permanently removed from the Tribunal and the matter is referred for further action.
-
Negligent (proper but based on inadequate review) → Arbiter receives guidance and additional training requirement
-
Affected party rights: The party affected by an emergency order may:
- File an immediate response challenging the factual basis
- Request a hearing before the review panel
-
Seek damages if the order is vacated and was found to be frivolous or malicious
-
Screening: Arbiter applications require demonstrated judgment, experience, and character. The application process (see Part I) is the first line of defense. Emergency authority is not granted lightly.
Part IV: Stage-by-Stage Authority Map
GRA{D|M}[E]JFAR Protocol — Who Can Do What
G — Grievance (Filing)
| Action | Authorized Tier | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| File a grievance (self) | Claimant (any registered user) | |
| File on behalf of another | Tier 1 (Advocate) | Requires active engagement agreement |
| Validate filing format | System (automatic) | |
| Assign case number | System (automatic) | |
| Assign to docket / set severity / set panel size | Tier 4 (Chief Arbiter) | Documented reasoning required |
| Reject frivolous filing | Tier 3+ (Arbiter) | Documented reason required; claimant may appeal rejection |
R — Response (Notification of Respondent)
| Action | Authorized Tier | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Serve notice on respondent | System (automatic) | Email, system notification |
| Verify service was completed | Tier 3+ (Arbiter) | If service bounces, Arbiter reviews |
| Extend response time | Tier 3+ (Arbiter) | E.g., respondent hard to reach |
| Respondent retains Advocate | Respondent (Party) | Documented engagement agreement |
| Advocate enters appearance | Tier 1 (Advocate) | For respondent representation |
A — Acknowledgment (21-day window)
| Action | Authorized Tier | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Acknowledge the grievance | Respondent or their Advocate | |
| Contest the grievance | Respondent or their Advocate | Triggers FULL track |
| Monitor deadline | System (automatic, Celery beat) | Hourly check |
| Auto-transition to D (Default) | System | Day 22, no acknowledgment |
| Auto-transition to M (Mediation) | System | Upon acknowledgment received |
| Grant extension of deadline | Tier 3+ (Arbiter) | Max 14 additional days, once |
Key rule: The system executes the transition, not a person. No human can "forget" to advance a case.
D — Default (FAST Track — Respondent Did Not Appear)
| Action | Authorized Tier | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Review default conditions | Tier 3 (Arbiter, presiding) | Was notice properly served? Is the grievance valid? |
| Confirm proper service | Tier 3 (Arbiter) | |
| Issue default judgment | Tier 3 + Tier 2 (Arbiter + 1 Panelist) | Both must agree |
| Object to default (bump to FULL track) | Tier 2 (confirming Panelist) | Safety valve — if anything seems wrong |
| Transition to F (Formalization) | Tier 3 (Arbiter) | After confirmation |
M — Mediation (FULL Track — Both Parties Present)
| Action | Authorized Tier | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Facilitate mediation | Tier 3 (Arbiter, presiding) | Arbiter guides, does not impose |
| Participate in mediation | Parties + their Advocates | |
| Propose settlement terms | Either party or their Advocate | |
| Accept settlement | Both parties (mutual) | |
| Declare mediation successful → skip to F | Tier 3 (Arbiter) | After both parties agree |
| Declare impasse → transition to E | Tier 3 (Arbiter) | Mediation failed |
| Set mediation deadline | Tier 3 (Arbiter) | |
| Observe mediation (public case) | Tier 0 (Observer) | View-only |
Key rule: Mediation is party-driven, Arbiter-facilitated. The Arbiter does not impose terms. A mediation settlement is binding and recorded, but it is the parties' agreement, not the Tribunal's judgment.
E — Evidence (45-day window)
| Action | Authorized Tier | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Submit evidence | Parties + their Advocates | |
| Challenge evidence (objection) | Opposing party or their Advocate | |
| Rule on evidence admissibility | Tier 3 (Arbiter, presiding) | |
| Request additional evidence | Tier 2+ (any assigned panel member) | |
| Extend evidence deadline | Tier 3 (Arbiter) | Max 30 additional days, once. Total cap: 75 days. |
| Close evidence phase → transition to J | Tier 3 (Arbiter) | After deadline expires or both parties rest |
| Review evidence | Tier 2+ (assigned panel members) |
Key rule: Hard cap of 75 days total (45 + one 30-day extension). After that, evidence closes automatically. No indefinite delays.
J — Judgment (30-day deliberation window)
| Action | Authorized Tier | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Deliberate | Full panel (Arbiter + Panelists) | Assigned panel only |
| Review evidence and arguments | Full panel | |
| Draft judgment | Tier 3 (Arbiter, presiding) | |
| Propose amendments to draft | Tier 2 (Panelists) | |
| Vote on judgment | All panel members (equal votes) | Tier 2+ assigned |
| Break tie | Tier 3 (Arbiter) | Only in true deadlock |
| Sign judgment (GPG) | All voting panel members | Majority signers |
| Issue dissenting opinion | Any minority panel member | Public record |
| Transition to F | System (automatic after vote) |
Key rules: - Majority rules. All votes are equal. Arbiter breaks ties only. - Dissent is recorded and published. Transparency over unanimity. - 30-day cap. Chief Arbiter may extend once (15 days) or reassign the panel. - All votes are GPG-signed. Each panel member signs individually.
F — Formalization (90-day appeal window)
| Action | Authorized Tier | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Generate formal judgment document | System (automatic) | |
| Sign judgment document (final seal) | Tier 3 (Arbiter, presiding) | GPG signature |
| OTS-anchor the judgment | System (automatic) | Bitcoin blockchain |
| Notify Lex Nigra (if applicable) | System (HMAC webhook) | |
| Notify Network Coordinator | System (HMAC webhook) | |
| File appeal | Losing party or their Advocate | Within 90 days |
| Review appeal validity | Tier 3+ (Arbiter or Chief Arbiter) | Not the original panel |
| Assign appeal to NEW panel | Tier 4 (Chief Arbiter) | No overlap with original panel |
| Remand for re-hearing | Tier 4 (Chief Arbiter) | New panel, with instructions |
| Monitor appeal deadline | System (automatic, Celery beat) | |
| Transition to A_ENFORCEMENT | System | After 90 days, no appeal |
Key rules: - Appeal panel has ZERO overlap with the original panel. - Appeal grounds: MISTAKE (factual/procedural error), FRAUD (fraudulent conduct), DURESS (coercion/undue pressure). - The Chief Arbiter reviews appeal validity but does NOT decide the substance. If valid → new panel. - Remand = "Go back and do it again properly." Chief Arbiter writes instructions for what to reconsider. Chief Arbiter CANNOT write what the new judgment should be.
A_ENFORCEMENT — Application for Enforcement
| Action | Authorized Tier | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Apply for enforcement | Winning party or their Advocate | |
| Review enforcement application | Tier 3 (Arbiter) | May be different from case panel |
| Approve enforcement | Tier 3 + Tier 2 (Arbiter + 1 Panelist) | Two pairs of eyes |
| OTS-anchor enforcement order | System (automatic) | |
| Register debtor in SOVAP | System (automatic) | Creates debtor record in sovereign ledger |
| Notify Trustee Corp (OptiMystic Holdings) | System (webhook) | For claim package administration |
| Issue PSI (Public Service Instruction) | Tier 3 (Arbiter) | |
| Package claim for marketplace | Tier 4 (Chief Arbiter) | If claim qualifies for assignment |
| Transition to R_RECONCILIATION | System | After enforcement issued |
Enforcement Mechanisms:
-
Lex Nigra Registry: Judgment debtors are listed on the federated blacklist. Tier 2 and 3 entries are shared across all member organizations in the Soteria Trust Network.
-
SOVAP Debt Registration: Obligations denominated in Soters (SOT) are registered in the Sovereign Accounting Protocol (SOVAP). The debtor's obligation is recorded on a dual-book ledger (GAAP + Sovereign) and may be discharged via the SOVAP Discharge Portal.
-
Claim Assignment to OptiMystic Holdings: Where a judgment creditor elects not to pursue collection directly, the claim may be assigned to OptiMystic Holdings Inc. — the mandated trustee corporation for the Soteria Covenant Trust. OptiMystic Holdings administers post-judgment claim packages through a transparent, cryptographically verified open-bidding marketplace. Claim packages are available to qualified external parties as pre-litigation instruments backed by SPAT judgments.
-
Public Service Instructions (PSI): Formal enforcement directives issued by the presiding Arbiter, requiring specific actions by member organizations.
R_RECONCILIATION — Settlement and Payment
| Action | Authorized Tier | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Submit reconciliation offer | Losing party or their Advocate | |
| Accept/reject offer | Winning party or their Advocate | |
| Supervise reconciliation | Tier 3 (Arbiter) | Original or newly assigned |
| Discharge via SOVAP | Debtor (self-service) | Full or partial payment via BTCPay |
| Confirm payment completed | Tier 3 (Arbiter) | With evidence of payment |
| Close case (reconciliation complete) | Tier 3 (Arbiter) | |
| Notify Lex Nigra (reduce/remove entry) | System (webhook) | |
| Notify SOVAP (update debtor record) | System (webhook) | Reflects partial/full discharge |
| Mark case as unreconciled (deadline) | System (automatic) |
Discharge Process: Debtors may discharge their obligations at any time through the SOVAP Discharge Portal. The portal accepts payment via Bitcoin, Lightning Network, or supported fiat methods through BTCPay Server. Partial payments are accepted and recorded. Upon full discharge, the debtor's Lex Nigra entry is removed and the case is closed. All transactions are permanently recorded on encrypted, GPG-signed ledgers.
Part V: Registration and Application Process
Registration Paths
All persons must register before interacting with the Tribunal. The registration page presents clear paths:
Choose Your Path:
[File a Grievance] → Register as Claimant (immediate access)
[Observe Hearings] → Register as Observer (agree to Code of Conduct, auto-approved)
[Apply as Advocate] → Full application (Chief Arbiter reviews)
[Apply as Panelist] → Full application (Chief Arbiter reviews, GPG key required)
[Apply as Arbiter] → Full application (Chief Arbiter reviews, GPG key + experience)
[Apply as Chief Arbiter] → Full application (existing Chief Arbiter(s) or Trust review)
Soteria Covenant members: Log in with your membership credentials.
Your membership authenticates your identity, but you must still apply for your Tribunal role.
Application Status Flow
SUBMITTED → UNDER_REVIEW → APPROVED / DENIED
│
└─ If DENIED: Applicant receives documented reason
May re-apply after 30 days
Application Requirements by Tier
| Tier | Requirements |
|---|---|
| Claimant | Name, email, password. No approval needed. |
| Tier 0 (Observer) | Agree to Observer Code of Conduct. Auto-approved. |
| Tier 1 (Advocate) | Qualifications, jurisdictions, pro bono availability, Code of Conduct. Chief Arbiter approval. |
| Tier 2 (Panelist) | Qualifications, jurisdictions, impartiality statement, Code of Conduct, active GPG key. Chief Arbiter approval. |
| Tier 3 (Arbiter) | All Panelist requirements + demonstrated experience + judicial philosophy statement. Chief Arbiter approval. |
| Tier 4 (Chief Arbiter) | All Arbiter requirements + leadership experience + vision statement. Existing Chief Arbiter(s) or Trust approval. |
Covenant Member Flow
- Covenant member logs in with Membership Portal credentials
- Identity is verified via the Membership API
- Tribunal account is auto-provisioned (synced: name, email, pma_id, covenant tier)
- First login: Member is presented with role selection (same paths as above)
- Member submits application for their chosen Tribunal role
- Application is reviewed and approved/denied through the standard process
- The Membership Portal's existing
MemberTribunalRoleappointment, if any, is noted on the application and may expedite review — but does not bypass the application
Part VI: Staffing and Capacity
When the Tribunal Lacks Panelists
Four mechanisms, in order of preference:
-
Global Pool: Tribunal staff may be from any jurisdiction in the world. A case in North America can have Panelists in Europe and Asia. Asynchronous deliberation accommodates time zones.
-
Pending Assignment Queue: If a panel cannot be formed, the case enters
PENDING_ASSIGNMENTstatus. Procedural deadlines pause until the panel is seated. Both parties are notified transparently. -
Reduced Panel with Consent: If both parties agree in writing, a FULL track case may proceed with a minimum of 1 Arbiter + 1 Panelist (reduced from 3). This is the parties' choice, documented in the case record.
-
Recruitment: The Chief Arbiter coordinates with the Membership Portal to identify and appoint qualified members as Panelists. This is an administrative action, not a judicial one.
What we do NOT do: Lower standards silently. If a panel cannot be formed, we say so openly. The case waits. Transparency over speed. That is more honest than one person deciding in secret.
Staff Workload Management
Each Tribunal staff member has a configurable max_active_cases (default: 10). The Chief Arbiter monitors workloads and distributes cases to prevent burnout and ensure quality deliberation.
Part VII: Codes of Conduct
To be developed in detail. The following are foundational principles.
All Tribunal Participants
- Truthful submissions — false statements subject to sanctions
- Respectful communication — no threats, harassment, or intimidation
- Timely responses — respect deadlines set by the Tribunal
Observer Code
- View-only participation in hearings
- No recording or redistribution of sealed materials
- No contact with parties regarding active cases
Advocate Code
- Client's interests above personal interests
- Full disclosure of fees and engagement terms
- No conflicts of interest (current or prior adverse representation)
- Truthful submissions — no knowingly false evidence or arguments
- Promptness — no unnecessary delays
Panelist and Arbiter Code
- Impartiality — no prejudgment, no ex parte communication
- Mandatory recusal when conflicts exist
- Confidentiality of deliberations (until judgment is published)
- GPG-signed votes — accountability for every decision
- Timely deliberation — respect the 30-day judgment window
Chief Arbiter Code
- Administrative neutrality — case assignment based on capacity and expertise, not favoritism
- Transparency — all assignment decisions documented with reasoning
- No interference in panel deliberations or judgments
- Servant leadership — the process comes first
Part VIII: Accountability and Audit
Immutable Record
Every action in the Tribunal system produces an audit log entry containing: - Who: The user/tier who performed the action - What: The specific action taken - When: Timestamp (UTC + Soterian Calendar) - Where: The case, stage, and context - Why: Documented reasoning (where applicable) - Signature: GPG signature of the actor (for Tier 2+ actions) - Anchor: OTS blockchain anchor (for critical events: filing, judgment, enforcement)
What Gets Anchored (OpenTimestamps + Bitcoin Blockchain)
- Grievance filing (G stage)
- Default judgment (D stage)
- Panel judgment (J stage)
- Formal judgment document (F stage)
- Emergency interim orders (EMERGENCY track)
- Enforcement orders (A_ENFORCEMENT stage)
- Reconciliation completion (R_RECONCILIATION stage)
- Appeal decisions
Conduct Review Process
If misconduct is alleged against any Tribunal staff member: 1. Complaint filed with the Chief Arbiter (or with the Trust if complaint is against the Chief Arbiter) 2. Preliminary review — is there substance? 3. If substantive: conduct review panel formed (must not include the accused) 4. Hearing — accused has the right to respond 5. Outcome: cleared, warned, suspended, or permanently removed 6. Decision recorded in the audit trail
Appendix A: Glossary
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Arbiter | Tier 3 — Presiding officer of a panel |
| Chief Arbiter | Tier 4 — Administrative head of the Tribunal |
| Claim Package | A post-judgment claim administered through OptiMystic Holdings for assignment to external parties |
| Claimant | The party who files a grievance |
| Doctrine of Equity | The binding doctrinal principles — classical maxims and SPAT-specific principles — governing adjudication |
| Engagement Agreement | Formal contract between Advocate and client |
| GPG | GNU Privacy Guard — cryptographic signing of documents and votes |
| Lex Nigra | The Soteria blacklist/warning registry — Tiers 1-3 |
| OptiMystic Holdings | Mandated trustee corporation administering post-judgment claim packages via open-bidding marketplace |
| OTS | OpenTimestamps — Bitcoin blockchain anchoring for immutable timestamping |
| Panel | The group of Panelists + Arbiter assigned to decide a case |
| Panelist | Tier 2 — Voting member of a panel |
| PSI | Public Service Instruction — enforcement directive |
| Quorum | Minimum number of panel members required to proceed |
| Remand | Chief Arbiter sends a case back to a new panel for re-hearing |
| Respondent | The party against whom a grievance is filed |
| SOT | Soter — the private unit of account used within the Soteria Covenant Trust |
| SOVAP | Sovereign Accounting Protocol — dual-book ledger system recording obligations and discharges |
| SPAT | Soteria Private Arbitration Tribunal — this institution |
Appendix B: Constitutional Amendments
This document may be amended by: 1. Proposal by any Chief Arbiter 2. Review by a panel of no fewer than 5 Arbiters 3. Majority vote of the review panel 4. Ratification by the Soteria Covenant Trust 5. Amendment recorded, GPG-signed, and OTS-anchored
This document is the constitutional foundation of the Soteria Private Arbitration Tribunal. It is GPG-signed, OTS-anchored, and part of the permanent record.