Governance model
The thesis argues that legitimacy requires balanced institutions, transparent processes, and strong community representation. It sketches a global governance model intended to harmonize legal mandates, professional standards, and community oversight.
Assembly of Stakeholders (AoS)
A legislature-like deliberative forum with representation across civil society, indigenous communities, regulators, industry, and academia. Seats are allocated through legitimacy-weighted elections intended to over-represent historically marginalized communities.
Proposed responsibilities include constitutional amendments, budgets, and appointing members to other bodies.
Validator Council (VC)
An executive-style council overseeing operational policies, validator accreditation, and technical standards. It coordinates cross-jurisdiction incident responses and publishes transparency reports.
Ethics Court (EC)
An ethics court intended to adjudicate disputes, interpret clauses, and issue binding opinions that guide future enforcement.
Standards alignment & interoperability
AMME is positioned as a “coordinating layer” that can plug into international certification and compliance workflows rather than replacing them.
Planned standards alignment
- ISO/IEC 42001 (AI management systems)
- ISO/IEC 38507 (governance implications of AI)
- IEEE P7000 series (human values, transparency, accountability, privacy)
- EU AI Act harmonization, plus African Union Data Policy Framework
Proposed open standards
- AMME-ETHICS-1 - schema for ethics packs, legitimacy weights, and remediation contracts
- AMME-OBS-1 - APIs for observability attestations, privacy budgets, and provenance
- AMME-GOV-1 - governance processes: elections and deliberation protocols
The thesis proposes transparent change processes: public comment, security review, and compatibility checks.
Ethical licensing, training, and transparency
The governance chapter proposes mechanisms for enforceability: ethical licensing, validator accreditation, and open transparency infrastructure.
Charter license (ACL)
Operators would sign a charter license committing to pluralistic engagement, data stewardship, and restorative compliance. Breaches could trigger graduated sanctions (remediation orders → suspension → public disclosure).
The thesis suggests incident reporting windows (e.g., within 72 hours) and contributions to a remediation fund proportionate to revenue.
Validator accreditation
Proposed training spans ethical theory, indigenous knowledge systems, AI safety engineering, restorative justice, and operational procedures. Certification is described as ongoing (renewal, disclosure of conflicts of interest, continuing education).
Transparency portals
The chapter describes open data portals that publish machine-readable logs of enforcement actions, remediation progress, and validator participation, aggregated to protect privacy but granular enough for independent analysis.
Governance evidence stack
The treatise emphasizes that governance claims must be matched with publishable evidence. AMME therefore pairs every governance action with an artifact that can be audited by regulators, civil society, and affected parties.
Institutional proof
- Charter license and quorum rules
- Validator accreditation and conflict disclosures
- Election logs and representative rosters
- Ethics Court rulings and remedy approvals
Operational proof
- Ethics pack releases and change logs
- Observability attestations and drift dashboards
- Incident dossiers and remediation reports
- Crosswalk table evidence bundles
Reference: AMME Governance Crosswalk Table.
Standards alignment profiles
AMME alignment profiles translate treatise artifacts into evidence packages suitable for external review. Each profile documents what to publish rather than reproducing external standard text.
Governance of governance
Formal checks on the legitimacy process itself.
AMME Extensions introduce an invariant registry that monitors whether governance bodies follow their own charter. Violations of quorum, representation, or transparency rules become enforceable incidents recorded in DPV and adjudicated by the Ethics Court. This creates a verifiable system for auditing the auditors.