The EOS constitution (or now dubbed into the more neutral term EOS Charter) continues to evolve and a v3 is currently being discussed. Yanika did a great job on several aspects of v2 (links below), and you can read the full v3 document on Google docs here.

The v3 document was drafted by Jetse Sprey from EOS Amsterdam, a lawyer with a long trackrecord in IT-related legal issues. And it shows. Where v1 and v2 looked more like a wish list, v3 has a more solid legal framework. It is now actively being discussed in EOS Open Alliance Telegram group and weekly calls in different languages across the globe. You can imagine that this is not an easy task as every round brings in new arguments and different perspectives or objections.

The EOS Charter deals with issues such as Voting mechanisms, Block Producers rights & obligations, damages and liabilities, dispute resolutions, arbitrations and applicable law.  Inherent to the international nature of the whole EOS ecosystem and the zero ownership, authors are walking a narrow path to come up with text that would survive in different jurisdictions. Or when a legal battle is unavoidable, making sure the intent of the contract is the decisive legal yardstick.

For example, when reading article 16 on Applicable Law, I quote:

16.1   This charter supersedes all national laws.
16.2   Should a law have mandatory provisions that hinder the execution of this charter, the parties shall, if and to the extent possible;
   16.2.1    Choose a law that doesn’t do so, or, to the extent that isn’t possible
   16.2.2    Amend this charter in a way that comes closest to its meaning within such mandatory provisions;
notwithstanding the arbitrator’s assignment to rule in all fairness without being bound to the strict rules of law.
 [end quote]

… one feels the thin line between binding legal terms and decentralized governance. This is a balance act. And although it is likely that the v3 Charter will not be the final document, the recent developments around Block Producers (e.g. lack of geographical spread, voting collusions) make it an urgently needed document. In that respect, v3 is a major step forward.

The charter needs to be approved or may be amended by a vote of at least 10% staked token holders, and at least 10% more Yes then No votes, sustained for at least 30 days in a 120 days period. This prevents that today’s hype is quickly incorporated into the Charter but changes need to mature first before they are included. On the other hand, let’s hope this does not lead to a polarized EOS society that blocks progress in a way politicians seem to favour nowadays.


If your time is short and want to keep posted, EOS Amsterdam has several editors scanning a range of EOS Telegram channels and condensing the most noteworthy items in daily reviews by category.



v3 EOS Charter document

Constitution Referendum Series  week #9

Constitution Referendum Series  week#10

From Yanika, series of articles on V2

15 votes, average: 4.53 out of 515 votes, average: 4.53 out of 515 votes, average: 4.53 out of 515 votes, average: 4.53 out of 515 votes, average: 4.53 out of 5 (15 votes, average: 4.53 out of 5)
You need to be a registered member to rate this.
(1296 total tokens earned)


  1. Workin2005

    Well said Peter. This certainly helps put perspective on just how difficult it is to have good, effective governance along with true decentralization. My guess is EOS has a lot more trial and error to come…but it’ll get there. Great post Peter. I have to wait to rate it.

  2. Conceptskip

    Excellent update, governance is just so important. I feel the EOS Alliance has a very good approach, yet i feel players and market dynamics might go well somewhere else from what the community expects. I reall hope to be wrong, but turned a bit pessimistic. I feel up to now it’s the only aspect where eos has been failing.