{
  "@context": {
    "@language": "en",
    "CIP100": "https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/blob/master/CIP-0100/README.md#",
    "CIP136": "https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/blob/master/CIP-0136/README.md#",
    "hashAlgorithm": "CIP100:hashAlgorithm",
    "body": {
      "@id": "CIP136:body",
      "@context": {
        "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"
          }
        }
      }
    }
  },
  "hashAlgorithm": "blake2b-256",
  "authors": [
    {
      "name": "Cardano Japan"
    }
  ],
  "body": {
    "summary": "7.5M for Community builder  ---- > Unconstitutional",
    "rationaleStatement": "[Unconstitutional] We considered the governance action as unconsitutional. This governance action was reviewed in accordance with the Cardano Blockchain Constitution, with particular focus on compliance with Article IV, Section 2, which requires that the budget specify a process for oversight of the use of funds withdrawn from the Cardano blockchain treasury, including the designation of one or more administrators responsible for such oversight.
Upon review, the majority of members identified significant concerns regarding the lack of clarity in the proposal’s fund management and oversight processes. Specifically, the proposal does not clearly designate an administrator or administrators responsible for overseeing the use of treasury funds, nor does it describe a transparent oversight process as mandated by the Constitution. The absence of this critical information raises a high likelihood that the proposal does not meet the constitutional requirement for transparency and accountability in the management of treasury funds.
While two members abstained from making a definitive determination, citing uncertainty or insufficient information, the majority consensus among members was that the proposal, in its current form, is unconstitutional due to non-compliance with Article IV, Section 2.
In conclusion, the majority of members have determined that this governance action is unconstitutional in its current form, due to failure to meet the transparency and oversight requirements explicitly outlined in the Constitution.",
    "internalVote": {
      "constitutional": 0,
      "unconstitutional": 3,
      "abstain": 2,
      "didNotVote": 0
    }
  }
}