BDIP-3: Article II - General Provisions

Article II - General Provisions

Section 1. Case. A case may be instituted by way of a complaint, petition, request for an advisory opinion and request for reconsideration.

Section 2. Relevant Party. Only a DAO member can institute a case. However, a community member may become a relevant party of a case if the community member is made a respondent to the said case.

Section 3. Jurisdiction. The DAO Court shall have jurisdiction over a case if, under the DAOstitution and this IRG, it is within its authority to decide or resolve. The jurisdiction of the DAO Court shall include:

  1. Interpretation of the DAOstitution, the Proposal Jury’s IRG, the DAO Court’s IRG, and any other rule or guidelines;
  2. Resolution of intra-DAO disputes, issues and controversies;
  3. Request for any affirmative or prohibitive relief in relation to DAO-related matters;
  4. Request to reconsider a decision or order in a case; and
  5. Any other subject matter similar to the foregoing.

Section 4. Quorum and Deliberation. The court members can only act in an official capacity if it constitutes a quorum of at least three (3) court members. Deliberations of court members in any case may be done privately through any reasonable mode of communication. It may also be done publicly through the forums such as when greater transparency is sought or when communication and interactions with the relevant parties to the case is necessary to inquire upon and clarify certain facts and collect more information about the case.

Section 5. Voting. In deciding a case, the court members shall adopt a voting procedure that promotes independence in thought and perspective. The voting procedure may be done manually or through the use of blockchain technology. As much as possible, the court members shall vote on each identifiable issue in a case and/or the reliefs sought in relation thereto. A majority vote from the quorum shall be sufficient to render a decision or order. An abstention shall be counted as a vote against the proposed course of action.

Section 6. Decision. A case shall be deemed to be resolved upon the issuance and publication of a decision whose contents shall include:

  1. A summary of the facts of the case;
  2. The findings and ruling on the dispute;
  3. The basis for such findings and ruling; and
  4. Remedy or relief granted in favor of the prevailing party.
A decision shall become effective upon its publication and shall become final upon the lapse of five (5) days unless a timely request for reconsideration is made within the said period.

Section 7. Order. An order may be made with respect to a pending case which shall either direct the relevant parties to undertake a particular course of action, whether in relation to a grant of a relief or not. An order shall become effective upon its publication and shall become final upon the lapse of five (5) days unless a timely request for reconsideration is made within the said period.

Section 8. Publication. A decision or order shall be published in the appropriate section of the DAO Forums.

Section 9. Request for Reconsideration. A request for the reconsideration of a decision or order must be made within five (5) days of its publication. The request for reconsideration shall include:

  1. The nature or summary of the decision or order sought to be reconsidered;
  2. The new issue(s) to be resolved by the DAO Court;
  3. The new evidence or documentation in support of the request; and
  4. The relief or remedy sought by the requesting party.

The DAO Court may immediately deny a request for reconsideration on the ground that the request raises no new issues or presents no new evidence or documentation. Otherwise, if the DAO Court determines that the request raises a new issue or presents new evidence or documentation, it shall have ten (10) days to resolve the request on substantive grounds. The decision or order shall become final upon the issuance and publication of a final decision on the request for reconsideration. Thereafter, no further request for reconsideration shall be allowed with respect to such final decision or order.

Section 10. Execution. Any decision or order of the DAO Court may be enforced and implemented by designated DAO members, or through a committee or commission specifically created for such purposes, all of whom should have or be given the capability or resources to facilitate and ensure its execution.


I love the idea that the deliberation can be done publicly. This promotes transparency and awareness for people. Which would make them feel included in the processes that are done.

I agree. I like that they are considering this option especially for cases that are in need of more audience and clarity. Kudos team!

Individuals become more open-minded and alert. which would enable them to experience a sense of involvement in the procedures. The possibility of public discussion throughout the decision-making is fantastic.

1 Like

Reasonable enough. As what olivia stated, it does promote transparency and awareness. Great article!

1 Like

I believe this article enforces the sections indicated in the Article VI of the DAOstitution.
With the general provisions set, conflicts involving community ethics and proper behavior will have a distinct guidelines. Do I interpret this right? :grin:

Section 8 and 10 is really helpful for everyone and is very efficient.

For section 9 on request for reconsideration. Can we file the request for the reconsideration multiple times? as long as we have new issues to be resolved.

That’s what I think as well when I read it. It’s like the detailed version of it.

1 Like

Great details and great structure :+1:
Hopefully we will always have such detailed and divided in parts proposal for avoiding all possible misunderstanding stuff :100:

1 Like

Feel free to share your insight on how it is efficient.

That’s right. We’d like to hear your thoughts about it :100:

I think he’s referring to the jury’s manner of publicizing a proposal as the Section 8 quoted

And is only done and enforce by the designated DAO member.

In section 9, would a new issue count as a new request or should it be connected to the current issue to be resolved? Because depending on the nature it can lead to a new issue.

I guess it would depend on the issue, but definitely if it branches out to a separate concern then it should be treated as a separate matter.

I agree. If the sought-after remedy has been resolved, then it should be connected to the current issue. However, just like you said, a separate discussion/proposal should be presented if the current issue leads to branching out a separate/new concern.

Right? That’s what I thought of as well when I read the article.

I appreciate that they are giving this alternative some thought, particularly in situations when there is a need for more audience and clarity. To prevent any potential misunderstandings, perhaps we will always have such a thorough and comprehensive proposal.

1 Like

I agree with you! They’re being transparent with us and provide us the necessary and detailed information.

Well said! It’s like looking forward to the future and solving the potential problems that may arise. That’s how advanced thinkers the team is. :smile: