The Statutes of the Decidim Association establish the fundamental principles governing the Association but leave certain aspects open for further specification and clarification through Internal Regulation. This article establishes the procedure for adopting the Internal Regulation and outlines the mechanism for its amendment. 

Pursuant to Article 15-H of the Statutes, the Internal Regulation shall be adopted and amended by the General Assembly following a structured and transparent deliberation process. Key Actors: Coordination Committee, Decidim Association Members, Community.

This process shall take place publicly on the Metadecidim platform and shall be conducted as follows:

1. Preparation Phase: A Drafting Committee, composed of community volunteers, is constituted to identify key topics requiring regulation.

2. Agenda Setting:
- The community is invited to comment on proposed topics and suggest additional areas for regulation.
- The Drafting Committee prioritizes topics and establishes working groups to develop drafts for the most urgent regulatory matters.

3. First Deliberative Cycle.
- Drafting: The Drafting Committee prepares initial drafts of priority topics.
- Community Deliberation: The drafts shall be subject to community discussion through participatory texts, online events, and eventually expert-facilitated dialogues.

4. Second Deliberative Cycle.
- Drafting: The Drafting Committee shall refine existing drafts based on the community feedback, and develop drafts for the second round of prioritized topics. - Community Deliberation: A second round of participatory discussion shall take place to further refine the second round of prioritized topics.

5. Review and Approval.
- Feedback Integration: The Drafting Committee consolidates community feedback into a revised version of the regulation.
- Coordination Committee Review: The Coordination Committee reviews the proposed text. In a joint meeting with the Drafting Committee, it approves, modifies or rejects the final version for submission to the General Assembly.
- General Assembly Vote: Each article approved by the Coordination Committee shall be submitted to the General Assembly for approval through a vote based on the majority rule.

The Internal Regulation shall be a dynamic document, subject to periodic review and updates to address emerging needs and previously unidentified topics. Revisions shall follow a similar participatory process to ensure continued alignment with the Association’s governance principles.

To start a modification cycle more than the defined minimum, please refer to the Decision-Making process. 

As the overall purpose of the Internal Regulation is to bring clarity to existing processes rather than to anticipate, proposals to improve the internal regulation must be based on actual practice. As defined in statuses [art 14-6], amendments to the Internal Regulation must be accepted through a General Assembly. However, this doesn’t mean this process should be slow and ineffective. In accordance with the principles of democratic inclusivity [Social Contract] and the requirements of effectiveness and efficiency [art 14-4], and based on experience [drafting committee], the following process must be applied at minimum to integrate amendments. 

1.The following guidelines may be extended to allow for experiments, but not modified.
2. For each modification cycle, durations and potential extensions must be published on Metadecidim before the beginning of the process. 
3. At the cycle start, every already submitted proposal is eligible to constitute an amendment. 
4. Proposals submitted after the start of the process will have to wait until the next one to be treated.
5. All the community can participate in steps 2, 3 and 5, but only members of the association can create amendments proposals. 
6. It is recommended that steps 2, 3 and 5 should have at least 1 public meeting facilitated by the Coordination Committee in order to make the process inclusive.
7. A communications channel dedicated to the internal regulations and their modification process will be created and maintained.
8. Minimum periodicity: if proposals for modifications are pending, the process should be launched at least once per year by the Coordination Committee, starting before May 1st at the latest, in order to treat amendments during the annual Ordinary General assembly. The Coordination Committee is exempt to run a cycle if no proposals are submitted.
9. All proposals, either rejected or accepted, must be answered publicly on Metadecidim. 

1.Amendment submission: Association members can create amendment proposals all year long on a dedicated Metadecidim component, in two categories:

- Minor corrections 

- Amendments or additions based on actual practice within the community. They must include: an explanation of why it’s an improvement to the regulation. An example of how or when it was experimented

2. Proposal selection: The Coordination Committee eliminates the proposals which are invalid based on the following criteria:

- proposals out of the scope of application of the internal regulation.

- proposals going against the social contract.

- proposals going against the statutes. 

- proposals based on anticipation rather than on reality.

3. Community questions: All the community can comment during a minimum of two weeks on the amendments proposals, to understand the proposal better and ask for clarifications. The proposing party is responsible to respond to requests for clarification.

4. Community feedback: All the community can comment for a minimum of 2 weeks on the amendments proposals, to give feedback to the amendments proposals, andexpress concerns, suggestions, or doubts. The proposing party may no longer respond to discussion. 

5. Feedback integration: During a minimum of 2 weeks, the proposer improves or withdraws the proposal based on community feedback.

6. Objection harvesting: During a minimum of two weeks, the Community and the Coordination Committee perform a final check on the proposal amendments before the General Assembly vote, to ensure the proposal is still valid in regard to step 2. 

7. General Assembly Vote: The final amendments shall be presented for approval by the General Assembly.

In case of Internal regulation interpretation uncertainty, the Coordination Committee is responsible for solving the conflict by interpreting the regulation.

In case of further conflicting views regarding this interpretation from the Coordination Committee, an appeal may be made to the Democratic Guarantee Committee. [See article on Decision-making process for procedure.]