O-01
Lived experience
Explains why an issue appeared important and what harm was feared.
Declared origin · designed independence
Public origin statementBorn from a case.
Independent of its outcome.
Por Derecho arose from a prolonged personal experience of complex records, fragmented decisions and consequences that were difficult to reverse. That experience explains the initial questions. It cannot decide institutional answers, replace evidence or turn a founder’s conviction into a conclusion of the method.
Four layers that must not be confused
From experience to a verifiable question
The personal origin is published so that no one has to infer it and every inferential step can be challenged.
O-02
Research hypothesis
Frames a question that may be confirmed, qualified, displaced or rejected.
O-03
Documentary record
Separates native source, date, authorship, version, knowledge available and inference.
O-04
Public-interest method
Turns the question into reusable checks of source, authority, perimeter, contradiction, consequence and reversibility.
Founder-related matters
Experimental application, not independent validation
Transparency requires the first real uses to be described with their correct status.
ICALPA DIP 80/2026 and DIP 79/2026
These are experimental research applications related to the founder. They test whether published rules can organise a real record without concealing uncertainty, defences, competence or the next human decision.
They are not external validation, institutional adoption, ICALPA endorsement or a disciplinary conclusion.
What they may demonstrate
They may demonstrate traceability, correction capacity, separation between matters, time-sensitive treatment of evidence and visibility of human gates. They cannot by themselves demonstrate general neutrality or institutional effectiveness.
The next legitimate test is an independent red-team exercise on synthetic cases under pre-declared criteria.
Independence tests
Independence is not declared once. It is exercised in every decision.
These rules move from the public narrative into the governance draft and the external-review protocol.
Prior rule
The control is fixed before anyone knows which result it will favour.
Real contradiction
The strongest contrary explanation is published, not a weakened version.
Recusal
The founder does not decide the conclusion of a personal or closely related matter.
Visible correction
A new source may change the state and leaves a version, date and reason trail.
Public layer
- method and limits;
- correct status of each application;
- declared conflicts and recusal rules;
- corrections and changed conclusions;
- review and adoption criteria.
Protected layer
- personal data and confidential material;
- legal strategy and privileged advice;
- protected-source identities;
- acquisition negotiations and diligence;
- information an institution has not authorised for publication.