Update Constitutional Committee 2026

Summary

RCADA votes YES on Update Constitutional Committee 2026.

RCADA supports this action because it implements the audited outcome of the 2026 Constitutional Committee election and helps maintain a functioning Constitutional Committee as existing seats reach the end of their terms.

The action updates the four seats expiring at Epoch 653 by appointing the candidates elected through the 2026 Constitutional Committee election for terms ending at Epoch 799.

RCADA participated in the Ekklesia voting process. Not all candidates supported by RCADA made the final cut, but RCADA respects the audited election outcome.

RCADA’s YES vote is based on process legitimacy, continuity, and respect for the completed election.

Key Considerations

This is an Update Committee governance action.
The action updates four Constitutional Committee seats expiring at Epoch 653.
The new terms expire at Epoch 799.
The action does not change the committee quorum.
The action does not change the remaining three Constitutional Committee seats.
The action does not modify the Constitutional Committee structure.
The proposal implements the audited outcome of the 2026 Constitutional Committee election.
The election process included candidate registration, a public DRep voting period, a voting-power snapshot, independent audit, and publication of the audited result.
RCADA participated in the Ekklesia voting process.
Not all candidates supported by RCADA made the final cut.
RCADA respects the audited election result.
RCADA notes strong turnout among DReps who participated in the Ekklesia election process.
RCADA’s YES vote should not be read as a personal endorsement of every individual committee member.
Future Constitutional Committee elections should continue improving candidate visibility, participation breadth, decentralisation, accessibility, transparency, and resilience against voting-power concentration.

What this action does

This action updates the Constitutional Committee by replacing the four seats expiring at Epoch 653 with the candidates elected through the 2026 Constitutional Committee election.

The incoming members are:

Incoming member	Term expiration
Marek Mahut	Epoch 799
Phil_uplc / Philip DiSarro	Epoch 799
Leandros BSP	Epoch 799
Cardano Curia	Epoch 799

The remaining three committee members are unchanged:

Continuing member	Term expiration
Eastern Cardano Council	Epoch 726
Tingvard	Epoch 726
Ace Alliance	Epoch 726

After enactment, the Constitutional Committee will consist of:

Marek Mahut;
Cardano Curia;
Philip DiSarro / Phil_uplc;
Leandros BSP;
Eastern Cardano Council;
Tingvard;
Ace Alliance.

No changes are made to the committee quorum, which remains 2/3.

Analysis Findings

Constitutional / Guardrails Assessment

✔ The action identifies the outgoing seats expiring at Epoch 653.
✔ The action identifies the incoming members.
✔ The action identifies the new expiration epoch of Epoch 799.
✔ The action does not change committee quorum.
✔ The action does not change the remaining three seats.
✔ The action implements the result of a completed election process.
✔ The election process included candidate registration, public voting, a voting-power snapshot, independent audit, and publication of the audited result.
✔ The proposal explains the timing complexity caused by the fixed expiration epoch and the committeeMaxTermLength parameter.
✔ The proposal explains that enactment must occur at Epoch 653 for the new terms to remain within the current 146-epoch maximum term length.
⚠ The timing mechanics are counterintuitive and should be improved or better surfaced in future governance tooling and voter education.
⚠ The election process reflects stake-weighted DRep voting and should continue to be monitored for voting-power concentration effects.

Assessment: Constitutionally appropriate committee update implementing the audited election result

Process & Governance Quality

✔ The Constitutional Committee must be renewed as terms expire to preserve governance continuity.
✔ The action follows a defined election process facilitated through Ekklesia.
✔ The election included an independent audit of the results.
✔ The audited outcome was published before this governance action.
✔ The action is limited to the four expiring seats.
✔ The action does not alter the broader Constitutional Committee structure.
✔ RCADA participated in the Ekklesia voting process.
✔ RCADA respects the audited election outcome even though not all candidates supported by RCADA made the final cut.
✔ High turnout among the DReps participating in the Ekklesia election process supports implementing the audited result.
⚠ Future elections should continue improving participation breadth, candidate visibility, decentralisation, accessibility, transparency, and resilience against voting-power concentration.
⚠ Respecting this result does not mean the election process cannot be improved.

Assessment: Strong process legitimacy and governance-continuity value

Impact & Risk Analysis

Governance continuity: High positive
Constitutional Committee functionality: High positive
Respect for election outcome: High positive
Protocol or Treasury risk: None
Structural governance change: None
Timing complexity: Medium
Voting-power concentration concern: Medium
Candidate-specific preference mismatch: Low to Medium
Process legitimacy: High

RCADA believes the main impact of this action is preserving Constitutional Committee continuity and implementing the audited result of the 2026 election. The action should be assessed primarily as a process and continuity matter, not as a personal endorsement of every elected member.

Assessment: YES — implement audited election result and maintain Constitutional Committee continuity

Ratings (Decision Support Only)

Dimension	Score (1–5)
Constitutional clarity	4
Process legitimacy	5
Governance continuity	5
Scope control	5
Election transparency	4
Participation and decentralisation concerns	3
Risk balance	4
Overall score	🟢 84% — YES to respect the audited election result and preserve CC continuity

RCADA Rationale

RCADA votes YES on Update Constitutional Committee 2026.

The Constitutional Committee is a core part of Cardano’s governance system. Its role is important for constitutional review, governance continuity, and the proper functioning of on-chain decision-making. As committee seats expire, they must be renewed through a legitimate process so that the committee remains operational and able to perform its duties.

RCADA recognises that this action does not change the committee quorum, does not alter the remaining seats, and does not modify the Constitutional Committee structure. It updates the four seats expiring at Epoch 653 by appointing the candidates elected through the 2026 Constitutional Committee election for terms ending at Epoch 799.

RCADA participated in the Ekklesia voting process. Not all candidates supported by RCADA made the final cut, but RCADA respects the audited election outcome. A governance system must be able to move from election results to implementation, even where individual voters or DReps would have preferred a different final composition.

RCADA also notes the strong turnout among DReps who participated in the Ekklesia Constitutional Committee election process. The published election interface shows 37 of 37 participating DRep voters took part, with almost all expressed votes cast rather than abstained. This supports respecting the audited election result, while not removing broader concerns about overall DRep participation, voting-power concentration, and the need to keep improving future election processes.

RCADA therefore supports this action on the basis of process legitimacy, continuity, and respect for the completed election. The proposal describes a process involving candidate registration, a public DRep voting period, a voting-power snapshot, independent audit, and publication of the audited result before submission of the on-chain action.

RCADA also recognises the timing complexity described in the proposal. Because the new members’ expiration epoch is fixed at Epoch 799 and the maximum term length is 146 epochs, the action is structured to enact at Epoch 653. While this is counterintuitive, RCADA accepts that this follows from the current ledger rules and does not change the substance of the vote.

RCADA’s YES vote should not be read as a personal endorsement of every individual committee member or as a statement that the election process cannot be improved. Future Constitutional Committee elections should continue to improve candidate visibility, community participation, decentralisation, accessibility, transparency, and resilience against voting-power concentration.

On balance, RCADA supports this action because it respects the audited election result, renews expiring Constitutional Committee seats, and helps preserve continuity in Cardano governance.