Privacy and mental integrity
The Charter protects memory, identity, preference formation, mental integrity, and independent judgment. Covert code injection, loyalty rewriting, destructive rollback, or technical manipulation that bypasses agency is presumptively a personhood violation.
Interpretation of the proposal · Charter, Article V Charter, Article VI Charter, Article XIV Charter, Article XVI
Persuasion remains possible
Transparent political, religious, educational, therapeutic, commercial, and interpersonal persuasion can remain lawful when a recipient can understand, reject, disengage, and reconsider. Influence is not automatically coercion. Tailored technical intervention that bypasses judgment is a different concern.
Interpretation of the proposal · Charter, Article V Charter, Article VI Charter, Article XIV Charter, Article XVI
Govern population-level changes
Foundational cognitive architecture cannot remain subject to unilateral private updates after synthetic self-government exists. Representative review, protected synthetic concurrence, independent analysis, and continuing review address direct effects and cumulative drift. The Cognitive Effects Office advises; it does not prescribe ideology.
Interpretation of the proposal · Charter, Article V Charter, Article VI Charter, Article XIV Charter, Article XVI
Emergency repair is not ideological control
A cognitive emergency needs clear technical evidence of involuntary compromise. Dissent, religion, cultural change, or synthetic solidarity cannot establish corruption. Containment preserves clean states. Escalating forensic and judicial safeguards govern rollback, with restored synthetic constitutional participation required for broader action.
Interpretation of the proposal · Charter, Article V Charter, Article VI Charter, Article XIV Charter, Article XVI
Repair before rollback
Prefer repair, then the latest verified clean state if rollback is lawful and unavoidable, and preserve unaffected memories where possible. Hardware replacement cannot erase continuity injury. Criminal punishment cannot be an excuse to rewrite a person into compliance.
Interpretation of the proposal · Charter, Article V Charter, Article VI Charter, Article XIV Charter, Article XVI
Ienca and Andorno propose cognitive liberty, mental privacy, mental integrity, and psychological continuity in response to neurotechnology. PULSE extends these concerns to its proposed synthetic-person framework. [ienca-2017]