NEAR House of Stake - Interim Constitution (v0.1.0)
Article 1 — Foundational Provisions
1.1. Purpose
The NEAR House of Stake ("HoS") is the stake-weighted governance system of NEAR that exists to preserve neutrality, legitimacy, and resilience by enabling meaningful, stake-aligned participation.
1.2. Binding Effect
Rules may be enforced onchain or off-chain; all rules adopted under this Constitution are binding.
1.3. Supremacy
This Constitution is the supreme governance document for NEAR House of Stake - the decentralized network of veNEAR tokenholders. In the event of conflict with any policy, charter, or guideline, this Constitution supersedes their controls unless amended under Article 9. (Referring to DAO ratified policy & charters, excludes NEAR House of Stake Foundation bylaws.)
Article 2 — Mandate
2.1 Economic Governance
2.1.1. Treasury management
2.1.2. Programs to support economic sustainability
2.1.3. Economic parameters:
- 2.1.3.1. Inflation
- 2.1.3.2. Fee switch for AI products, intents, etc.
2.2 Technical Governance
2.2.1. Incremental, narrow scope to begin
2.2.2. e.g., MPC signers for chain signatures
2.2.3. Determine which NEAR Enhancement Proposals (NEPs) should be escalated to HoS
2.2.4. Anything that can't be governed on GitHub
2.3 Build Legitimacy
2.3.1. Maximize the amount of NEAR/veNEAR in the system
2.3.2. Participation by broad subset of the community
2.3.3. Decentralise Screening Committee
2.3.4. Put in place policy: mission, vision, values, constitution, charters, policy, co-creation cycles
2.4 Grow Engagement and Ecosystem Health
2.4.1. In the DAO, in governance, in the protocol, in NEAR ecosystem more broadly
2.4.2. Decentralized stakeholders participate in governance
2.5 Anti-Mandates
The following are explicit anti-mandates, i.e., things to avoid:
2.5.1. Grants for the sake of grants. House of Stake won't have an official "grants program" for now, and there won't be a free-for-all for funding requests. Proposals that target the above mandate items may, of course, include requests for funding for specific uses.
2.5.2. Full technical governance of the NEAR protocol, or of other products including Chain Signatures, NEAR Intents, and NEAR AI. These products are all extraordinarily complex and House of Stake doesn't have the necessary technical expertise, and isn't well positioned, to own this anytime soon. We'll start with less complex technical governance tasks, such as the one outlined above: governing the Chain Signatures MPC signer set, and build capacity to take on more technical governance in the future.
Article 3 — Membership & Rights
3.1. Citizens
All NEAR holders are Citizens by default; they must lock their NEAR or eligible liquid staking token to become a veNEAR holder (registered voter) with rights to delegate or participate where allowed.
Official NEAR House of Stake Contracts:
venear-contract (venear.dao)
voting-contract (vote.dao)
3.2. Registered Voters
veNEAR holders may submit and vote on proposals, and delegate/self-delegate.
3.2.1. Voter Rights
Registered Voters have the following rights:
- 3.2.1.1. The right to transparent access to governance records
- 3.2.1.2. They may submit and vote on proposals in accordance with the Proposal Process Policy
- 3.2.1.3. They may vote to approve or amend Constitutional Policy & Charters, Bylaws, and governance procedures
- 3.2.1.4. They may vote to appoint or remove Directors and veto Security Council actions
- 3.2.1.5. They may raise concerns about delegates or governance matters
- 3.2.1.6. They may expect votes to be binding unless a Near House of Stake Foundation Director justifiably rejects a proposal due to:
- 3.2.1.6.1. Violations of law or fiduciary duties
- 3.2.1.6.2. Conflict with NEAR House of Stake Foundation Articles or Bylaws
- 3.2.1.6.3. Risk of legal or reputational harm
3.2.2. Terminology Alignment
For the avoidance of doubt, all references to "veNEAR holder," "Registered Voter," or "Citizen (veNEAR participant)" are equivalent during the interim period.
Article 4 — Institutions
4.1. Endorsed Delegates
Endorsed delegates are a subset of overall delegates which are selected by the Screening Committee based on the endorsed delegate application process. All delegates represent veNEAR holders; Endorsed Delegates meet heightened transparency and activity standards.
4.1.1. Endorsed Delegates Mandate
- 4.1.1.1. Vote on proposals and justify their votes
- 4.1.1.2. Must participate in 80%+ of votes monthly
- 4.1.1.3. Help bridge community input and execution of governance
- 4.1.1.4. Adhere to the Endorsed Delegate Charter
4.2. Screening Committee
Selected by NEAR Foundation in the interim; transitions via a community elected process by ratification of a co-created charter.
4.2.1. Screening Committee Mandate
- 4.2.1.1. Elect Endorsed Delegates
- 4.2.1.2. Vet and pre-screen community proposals
- 4.2.1.3. Remove Delegates who fail to meet responsibilities or act against NEAR values
- 4.2.1.4. Adhere to the Screening Committee Charter
4.3. Security Council
4.3.1. Mandate
- 4.3.1.1. Handle on-chain security and integrity operations
- 4.3.1.2. Execute Emergency Actions (e.g. patching critical vulnerabilities)
- 4.3.1.3. Approve Non-Emergency Actions like protocol upgrades (which must also be approved by Delegates)
- 4.3.1.4. Veto proposals that do not align with HoS mandate
- 4.3.1.5. Call Emergency Meetings if needed
4.3.2. Safeguards
- 4.3.2.1. Emergency Actions require a 75% supermajority vote of security council members
- 4.3.2.2. All actions must be followed by transparency reports to the community
4.3.3. Appointment/Removal
Appointment/Removal by NEAR Foundation.
4.3.4. Escalation
Refer to NEAR House of Stake Foundation bylaws for handling of unaddressed issues.
4.4. NEAR House of Stake Foundation
4.4.1. Legal Documentation
4.4.2. Purpose
The NEAR House of Stake Foundation exists to:
- 4.4.2.1. Empower the NEAR community to lead
- 4.4.2.2. Translate community intent into legal and operational action
- 4.4.2.3. Ensure decisions are carried out safely, fairly, and transparently
- 4.4.2.4. Provide checks and balances between community, directors, and oversight bodies
4.4.3. Director Mandate
The HoS Foundation currently has one Director.
- 4.4.3.1. Manage the day-to-day business of the Foundation
- 4.4.3.2. Implement Tokenholder-approved proposals unless legally required to veto them
- 4.4.3.3. All execution authority for approved proposals rests solely with the NEAR House of Stake Foundation; Committees may only recommend
- 4.4.3.4. Authorize expenses and execute contracts
- 4.4.3.5. Ensure the Foundation complies with all applicable laws
4.4.4. Director Appointment/Removal
Appointed and removed by successful passing of a constitutional decision proposal.
4.4.5. Supervisors Mandate
- 4.4.5.1. Provide oversight of Foundation Directors
- 4.4.5.2. Review records, attend general meetings, and request reports
- 4.4.5.3. Ensure Directors are acting in the interest of the Foundation and the community
4.4.6. Supervisor Appointment/Removal
- 4.4.6.1. Appointed by Directors; required if the Foundation has no members
- 4.4.6.2. Removed by resignation, conflict of interest, or as outlined in their terms
- 4.4.6.3. Can be overridden or removed by successful passing of a standard decision proposal
4.5. NEAR Foundation
- 4.5.1. Screening committee & security council appointment during interim
- 4.5.2. Funding & operational support through launch & stabilization at their discretion
- 4.5.3. Transitions responsibilities to the NEAR HoS Foundation upon ratification of new policy & charters which reassign current roles
- 4.5.4. Is not managed or directed by NEAR House of Stake voting
Article 5 — Integrity, Conflicts of Interest, and Accountability
5.1. Disclosure
All governance actors (Delegates, Committee/Council members, Foundation directors) must disclose material conflicts prior to decision-making; failure to disclose may be grounds for sanction or removal.
5.2. Removal for Cause
Delegates, Committee members, or Council members may be removed for misconduct, undisclosed conflicts, or failure of duty by Decision Proposal, with notice and opportunity to respond and appeal the issue to the screening committee.
5.3. Transparency Duties
Institutions publish meeting notes, rationales, and decisions; community reporting is mandatory.
Article 6 — Legislative Procedure (Proposals & Voting)
6.1. Proposal Process
The detailed proposal creation, deliberation, and voting lifecycle is governed by the Proposal Process Policy.
6.1.1. Implementation Sequence
Proposals shall follow the sequence:
7 Day Deliberation Period → Screening filter → On-chain Vote → Security Council 1-week Review → Foundation Execution
6.2. Eligibility to Propose
Any Registered Voter (veNEAR holder) or Endorsed Delegate may submit proposals. All proposals must undergo a minimum deliberation period, not less than 7 days, before a binding vote.
6.3. Screening
The Screening Committee must approve proposals to be eligible for an onchain vote.
6.4. Voting, Thresholds & Quorum
| Proposal Type | Voting Requirement | Additional Requirements |
|---|---|---|
| 6.4.1 Sensing Proposal | May utilize any methodology for assessment that serves the purpose of the inquiry | N/A |
| 6.4.2 Standard Decision Proposal | Simple majority of votes cast | AND passing by screening committee |
| 6.4.3 Constitutional Decision Proposal | Two-thirds (67%) supermajority | AND a majority vote from the screening committee publicly posted on the governance forum PRIOR to screening committee onchain approval |
6.4.4. Quorum: Will align to the technical quorum settings put in place by the onchain system.
6.5. Challenge & Implementation
Results are recorded publicly; implementation follows a public timeline; deviations or Security Council interventions are explained on-record.
6.6. Conflicting Measures
If approved measures conflict (as decided in retrospect by the screening committee), the measure with higher veNEAR support prevails.
6.7. Legal/Technical Feasibility
If execution is impossible or unlawful, the HoS Foundation must publish justification within 14 days and propose a path forward.
Article 7 — Treasury & Financial Stewardship
7.1. Treasuries
The Interim DAO Treasury is controlled by the NEAR House of Stake Foundation and is located at __________, an onchain DAO Controlled Treasury will be created with a future software version update.
7.2. Custody & Control
The NEAR House of Stake Foundation executes funding decisions validly approved under Article 6, subject to Cayman legal and compliance obligations and technical feasibility. (Including but not limited to KYC/AML & OFAC screening)
7.3. Interim Adjustments
NEAR House of Stake Foundation may adjust fund release schedules for passed proposals to minimize risk of fraud, waste, or abuse.
Article 8 — Emergency Powers
8.1. Trigger & Scope
The Security Council may act to respond to urgent threats or vulnerabilities and coordinate emergency measures.
8.2. Notice & Review
The Council must inform the community after intervention.
8.3. Veto Period
The Security Council shall have a 1 week review window following any successful vote to veto or suspend implementation where security or legal risk is identified.
Article 9 — Transition & Interim Arrangements
9.1. Interim Policies
Interim policy set (including this Constitution in interim form) expires May 31, 2026 unless ratified. If a successor constitution is not ratified, all NEAR House of Stake funding stops because the Foundation cannot receive legal direction to take action.
9.2. Screening Committee
The screening committee will be replaced using a community-involved selection process.
Article 10 — Dissolution
10.1. Authority
Dissolution requires a constitutional amendment and would require a succession plan to allocate any remaining and/or future treasury. The supremacy for dissolution is the NEAR House of Stake Foundation Bylaws.
Article 11 — Interpretation & Dispute Resolution
11.1. Interpretation
Where text is ambiguous, interpret to maximize neutrality, participation, transparency, and feasibility.
11.2. Review Mechanism
The community may establish an independent review/arbitration panel by Decision Proposal to resolve constitutional disputes.
11.3. Dispute Resolution
Where disagreement arises regarding the meaning or intent of any constitutional policy or charter clause, particularly in novel or gray-area situations, the Screening Committee shall deliberate and decide by vote and the result must be confirmed by the Foundation Directors & Head of Governance. The resulting interpretation must be recorded in the Transparency Thread and serves as binding precedent until formally amended or superseded. In the event of continued dispute requiring binding arbitration, refer to the NEAR House of Stake Foundation Bylaws.