{
"@context": {
"@language": "en-us",
"CIP100": "https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/blob/master/CIP-0100/README.md#",
"CIP129": "https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/blob/master/CIP-0129/README.md#",
"CIP136": "https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/blob/master/CIP-0136/README.md#",
"hashAlgorithm": "CIP100:hashAlgorithm",
"body": {
"@id": "CIP136:body",
"@context": {
"govActionId": "CIP129:governance-action-identifiers",
"references": {
"@id": "CIP100:references",
"@container": "@set",
"@context": {
"GovernanceMetadata": "CIP100:GovernanceMetadataReference",
"Other": "CIP100:OtherReference",
"label": "CIP100:reference-label",
"uri": "CIP100:reference-uri",
"RelevantArticles": "CIP136:RelevantArticles"
}
},
"summary": "CIP136:summary",
"rationaleStatement": "CIP136:rationaleStatement",
"precedentDiscussion": "CIP136:precedentDiscussion",
"counterargumentDiscussion": "CIP136:counterargumentDiscussion",
"conclusion": "CIP136:conclusion",
"internalVote": {
"@id": "CIP136:internalVote",
"@container": "@set",
"@context": {
"constitutional": "CIP136:constitutional",
"unconstitutional": "CIP136:unconstitutional",
"abstain": "CIP136:abstain",
"didNotVote": "CIP136:didNotVote",
"againstVote": "CIP136:againstVote"
}
}
}
},
"authors": {
"@id": "CIP100:authors",
"@container": "@set",
"@context": {
"did": "@id",
"name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
"witness": {
"@id": "CIP100:witness",
"@context": {
"witnessAlgorithm": "CIP100:witnessAlgorithm",
"publicKey": "CIP100:publicKey",
"signature": "CIP100:signature"
}
}
}
}
},
"hashAlgorithm": "blake2b-256",
"body": {
"govActionId": "gov_action1wfy3vzxurfgq6wrpxg2qdx3t6wm7ng8xwr26h47kxa8xhd20cr5qqz0wzfc",
"summary": "Ace Alliance finds the proposed \"PFMS: Bringing Government Scale Adoption to Cardano by Trivolve Tech\" Treasury Withdrawals Governance Action Constitutional. Rationales are archived at https://github.com/ace-alliance/ace-voting/",
"rationaleStatement": "A [PDF version][pdf-link] of this rationale is also made available.\n\n[pdf-link]: ipfs://bafkreih7jrjvikzrhqkfkjnqpitsmt5bvurotmo3wokapfhompgl7m6lhi\n\n\"PFMS: Bringing Government Scale Adoption to Cardano by Trivolve Tech\" (gov_action1wfy3vzxurfgq6wrpxg2qdx3t6wm7ng8xwr26h47kxa8xhd20cr5qqz0wzfc) is a Treasury Withdrawals Governance Action and is therefore governed by both the general proposal standards in Article II.6 and the additional Treasury Withdrawal standards in Article II.7. The Action seeks 9,600,000 ada to fund the design, development, and deployment over 15 months of the Police Force Management System, an open-source evidence layer that fingerprints and timestamps police and justice records on Cardano mainnet across five stages of a criminal case, with the Indian state of Telangana as its first deployment. The recipient and lead implementer is Trivolve Tech, with Quixy (Vivid Minds Pvt Ltd) as subcontractor. The ask is released in a kickoff tranche of 1,800,000 ada on signature of the administrator contract and four milestone tranches of 2,000,000, 2,000,000, 2,000,000, and 1,800,000 ada at months 3, 8, 12, and 15. The Cardano Foundation is designated as administrator.\n\nUnder Article II.6.1, governance actions \"shall follow a standardized and legible format before being recorded or enacted on-chain,\" supported by a document that \"shall be immutable and incapable of being altered after submission.\" The anchor is a content-addressed IPFS document, a form that cannot be made to resolve to altered content after submission, and we computed its blake2b-256 hash from the retrieved document as 09e2ef6f02fd53aab203c872f082f888e8c53b383377a13e3b71eb08550be389 and matched it against the hash recorded on-chain rather than relying on an indexer validity flag. The withdrawal amount and destination recorded on-chain are identical to those stated in the metadata. The proposal states that the metadata embeds a blake2b-256 hash of the full proposal document, and it does not; the referenced documents are themselves hosted at content-addressed IPFS locations, however, so their content is fixed by their identifiers and the inaccuracy does not affect the finding. The metadata supplies the title, abstract, motivation, rationale, budget, payment schedule, risk discussion, and supporting references that Article II.6.2 requires. Under Article II.7.1, Treasury Withdrawals \"must specify the terms of the withdrawal,\" including \"the purpose of the withdrawal, the period for delivery of proposed activities which the withdrawal shall be used for, the relevant costs and expenses of the proposed activities, circumstances under which the withdrawal might be refunded to the Cardano Treasury.\" Each of these is specified: the purpose, a 15-month delivery period, eight budget line items summing to the amount recorded on-chain, and refund circumstances covering unspent ada at programme end, material milestone failure, fraud, and scope abandonment, together with a cap on expenditure at 0.30 USD per ada above which value is returned to the Cardano Treasury. The disclosure requirement of Article II.7.2 is met expressly: Trivolve Tech and Quixy state that neither has received ada from the Cardano Treasury through a Treasury Withdrawals action in the prior 24 months, and they separately disclose approximately 1.49 million ada of Project Catalyst funding across Fund 12 and Fund 14. A Net Change Limit of 500,000,000 ada is in force for the period spanning epochs 613 through 713, and this withdrawal does not cause that limit to be exceeded, satisfying Article II.7.3 and TREASURY-02a. The withdrawal is denominated in ada as TREASURY-03a requires, the USD figures serving only as planning references.\n\nUnder Article II.7.5, Treasury Withdrawals \"shall designate one or more administrators responsible for monitoring how the funds are used, and ensuring the deliverables are achieved,\" and the proposal designates the Cardano Foundation, an entity distinct from the recipient, which will conclude an off-chain legal contract with Trivolve Tech for delivery. The Cardano Foundation has publicly agreed to that designation. The submission transaction spends an input from the same key-controlled address that submitted the earlier governance actions of the Cardano Foundation, so the submitting key of the Foundation witnessed this submission. The metadata also carries a Cardano Foundation author witness whose signature we verified over the canonicalized document body; it is made with a key different from the one on earlier Foundation anchors, so we do not rest the finding on it alone. Under Article II.7.4, which requires \"an allocation of ada as a part of such funding request to cover the cost of periodic independent audits and the implementation of oversight metrics as to the use of such ada,\" the budget allocates 480,000 ada to project management and audit and 200,000 ada to administration by the Cardano Foundation. From those allocations, a competitively procured independent assurer reviews the delivered work and conducts independent audits at each of the four delivery milestones, with the shortlist, selection basis, appointed assurer, and its confirmation of no conflict of interest published. The oversight metrics are implemented through milestone reports, a public dashboard of milestone acceptance and disbursements, and a final reconciliation, and no tranche after the kickoff is released until both the assurer and the Cardano Foundation have verified the milestone deliverables. On the record before us, that is sufficient. Under Article II.7.6, the on-chain withdrawal destination is stake1uyyqmz5ae7ct4f26p4t87y2xrrgu7f3e0cpap66zgcnxu0gl7gy6y, a key-hash stake address (CIP-19 mainnet header byte 0xe1) controlled by the Cardano Foundation, which is not delegated to any stake pool and is delegated to the predefined always-abstain DRep, each of which we verified on-chain at the time of this review. Only the Treasury Withdrawal guardrails in Appendix I.3 are engaged, and each is addressed above.",
"precedentDiscussion": "None",
"counterargumentDiscussion": "A reviewer might argue that Article II.7.6 is not satisfied, because the proposal states that withdrawn funds \"are held by the administrator's multi-sig wallet address,\" while the on-chain destination is an ordinary key-hash stake address with no multisignature script. That address is also the account to which the Cardano Foundation has had its governance action deposits returned, including the deposit for this action, rather than an account dedicated to these funds. We acknowledge that this argument has force: the custody the metadata describes is not the custody the chain records, and DReps are entitled to weigh that inaccuracy. We reject that view on these facts. Article II.7.6 requires that ada held by an administrator be kept \"in one or more separate accounts that can be audited by the Cardano Community,\" that such accounts \"shall not be delegated to an SPO,\" and that they \"must be delegated to the predefined abstain voting option.\" It does not prescribe a signing arrangement, and the account identified meets each requirement it does set: it held no funds of significance at the time of review, every movement into and out of it is publicly traceable, and the treasury withdrawal and any deposit refund arrive as distinct, identifiable on-chain credits. Key-hash custody is acceptable where, as here, the administrator is distinct from the recipient and bears legal responsibility under a contract with it. The holding-period obligations of Article II.7.6 continue to apply for as long as the Cardano Foundation holds the funds, including in any account to which it moves them and in any hedging arrangement.\n\nA reviewer might further argue that Article II.7.4 is not satisfied, because the audit cost shares a single 480,000 ada line with the project management of the recipient, and because the independent assurer is procured within the work package of the recipient itself, so the party being audited selects and pays its auditor. This is a serious question and we have taken it seriously. We reject that view on these facts: Article II.7.4 requires an allocation, not an itemization, and the allocation here is tied to a defined function with a stated scope and cadence, namely independent review and audit of the delivered work at each of the four milestones. The procurement is not left to the discretion of the recipient: it is competitive, its shortlist, selection basis, and the written confirmation of the assurer that it has no conflict of interest are published, and the Cardano Foundation, as administrator, verifies each milestone alongside the assurer before any tranche after the kickoff is released. Whether a separately itemized audit line or an assurer appointed by the administrator would be the better design is a question committed to the Cardano Community and its DReps to decide, not to the Constitutional Committee.\n\nA reviewer might also argue that the proposal withholds relevant supporting materials, because the project agreements with the state government are confidential and have been viewed only by the Cardano Foundation. We reject that view on these facts: Article II.6.2 requires \"sufficient rationale, including at minimum: a title, abstract, justification, and relevant supporting materials,\" and Article II.7.1 requires the terms of the withdrawal, not the terms of the commercial arrangements of the recipient with third parties. The terms of the withdrawal, its purpose, period, costs, and refund circumstances, are stated in full in the anchored metadata. Whether DReps are content to rely on the review of those agreements by the administrator, like whether 1,800,000 ada should be released on contract signing before any deliverable is verified, is a question of policy for them.",
"conclusion": "Ace Alliance finds the proposed \"PFMS: Bringing Government Scale Adoption to Cardano by Trivolve Tech\" Treasury Withdrawals Governance Action Constitutional.",
"internalVote": {
"constitutional": 5,
"unconstitutional": 0,
"abstain": 0,
"didNotVote": 0,
"againstVote": 0
},
"references": [
{
"@type": "RelevantArticles",
"label": "Cardano Constitution",
"uri": "ipfs://bafkreieyuknozbtewyurfqoagvplvykadn6a4u6wglupavdz46bbsnnl6e"
},
{
"@type": "GovernanceMetadata",
"label": "Proposal Metadata Anchor URI",
"uri": "ipfs://QmQJM9FmVs1HHeqz4PBEhizicsuXEp3VkdEMjqApG7KsBT"
},
{
"@type": "GovernanceMetadata",
"label": "Proposal Metadata Anchor Hash",
"uri": "09e2ef6f02fd53aab203c872f082f888e8c53b383377a13e3b71eb08550be389"
},
{
"@type": "GovernanceMetadata",
"label": "PFMS Full Proposal",
"uri": "ipfs://QmWaohWccfdSe9NQz5DQ5myZ9QHWg61xhRvN8KTJGiTGVF"
},
{
"@type": "GovernanceMetadata",
"label": "PFMS Work Packages and Milestones",
"uri": "ipfs://QmYjjNJiPoZkk4Fwu34y2Uwdpjx7GuFBgEuKMAwK5Jm8F2"
},
{
"@type": "Other",
"label": "Submission Transaction",
"uri": "72491608dc1a500d38613214069a2bd3b7e9a0e670d5abd7d6374e6bb54fc0e8"
},
{
"@type": "Other",
"label": "On-chain Withdrawal Destination Stake Address",
"uri": "stake1uyyqmz5ae7ct4f26p4t87y2xrrgu7f3e0cpap66zgcnxu0gl7gy6y"
}
]
},
"authors": [
{
"name": "Ace Alliance"
}
]
}