blake2b-256
We have determined that this Info action does not meet the criteria deemed necessary for the Constitutional Committee to assess its constitutionality.
Article VII, Section 1 of the Cardano Constitution states "The Constitutional Committee shall comprise a set of owners of ada that is collectively responsible for ensuring that on-chain governance actions prior to enactment on-chain, are constitutional." Additionally; Article VII, Section 4, Paragraph 2 states "Because "Info" actions have no on-chain effect and, accordingly, are neither constitutional nor unconstitutional, Constitutional Committee members may not prevent "Info" actions from being recorded on-chain. Members of the Constitutional Committee may nevertheless record a vote on-chain regarding an "Info" action in order to express their view on such "Info" action, including whether the suggested course of action proposed in such "Info" action, would be, in the view of such member, unconstitutional if it were to be enforced by on-chain mechanisms." Finally; Article VII, Section 4, Paragraph 3 states "In the case of "Info" actions that propose a Cardano Blockchain ecosystem budget, Constitutional Committee members shall record a vote on-chain that sets forth their opinion as to whether the proposed budget, if it were to be implemented in the form contained in the "Info" action, would violate this Constitution." The governance action with ID "gov_action15dh2lt4qskmhl97vat8s0l552ruvddrlasa0jndg7lg43g0uju3qq78hvja" and title "Securing Generic Top-Level Domains for the Cardano Ecosystem", as an Info governance action, does not relate to a budget proposal, nor does it gauge sentiment towards another type of governance action which could be enacted on-chain, so the Constitutional Committee is not empowered to assess its constitutionality, ensuring DReps and SPOs are the only ones able to influence its outcome. We therefore **Abstain**.
None
We abstain from assessing the constitutionality of this governance action.
Eastern Cardano Council