Certification Rules
Version 31 July 2026 · effective and last updated 31 July 2026 · last reviewed 1 August 2026
These rules explain how the Sacred Logic™ Charter Mark is assessed, granted, maintained, and withdrawn. They are published so applicants and the public understand the basis of certification. They sit alongside the Terms of Service and the Human Values Framework.
1. What the Charter Mark is
The Charter Mark is a voluntary AI assurance scheme consistent with the voluntary code-of-conduct approach contemplated by Article 95 of the EU AI Act. It certifies that an AI system was assessed against the published 10-point Human Values Framework and passed a human-validation step. It is not a statutory EU AI Act conformity assessment, does not confer a CE mark or any legal presumption of conformity, and Sacred Logic™ is not a notified body or a governmental authority.
1a. The certification lifecycle, named
In order, a Charter Mark moves through: issue (§ 5), ongoing validity with the possibility of suspension and investigation (§ 7), appeal of any adverse decision (§ 8), reinstatement if the underlying issue is resolved (§ 7), and eventually expiry or withdrawal (§ 6–7). Every stage is recorded in the append-only admin audit log.
2. Scope and eligibility
Certification applies to a defined AI system and a stated scope of use, not to an organisation as a whole. Any organisation may apply. The applicant is responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the information submitted, and for keeping certified information current.
3. Assessment methodology
Assessment is evidence-based. The applicant provides one combined proof document per framework point (ten on the full route; on the Compliance Fast Track only points 8–10, with declared EU AI Act conformity relied on for points 1–7 and checked documentarily rather than re-audited).A free self-assessment gives an instant, provisional readiness score and tier suggestion. This is informational only. A Charter Mark is granted only after a person reviews the submitted evidence against the framework and records a decision. See our AI Transparency Statement for how that score is calculated and where AI is (and isn't) involved.
4. Impartiality, independence and conflicts of interest
Sacred Logic™ operates an independent, founder-led certification scheme. We do not build, market, sell, or operate AI systems, and we do not assess any system we or a connected party supplied. Personnel with a conflict in a given application are excluded from its assessment and decision.Who reviews applications, today. Human validation is currently performed by Sacred Logic™'s founder, Andrew Waterhouse, as governance is presently sole-founder. We say this plainly rather than imply a review panel that doesn't yet exist: with a single reviewer, a conflicted application is declined rather than reassigned internally, and a formal multi-reviewer independence structure — including documented reviewer competency criteria and a separation between assessment and the certification decision — is an outstanding item as the scheme grows, tracked alongside our other accreditation-readiness work.A fee funds the assessment process only; it does not purchase, influence, or guarantee a mark. Tiers are priced by organisation scale, not by any difference in the standard applied — every tier meets the same framework. These commitments are binding under Terms of Service § 3.
5. Certification decisions
After review we either issue the mark, or decline it with a recorded reason and, where appropriate, the gaps to address. Decisions are based solely on the evidence measured against the framework. Every decision and lifecycle action is recorded in an append-only audit log.
6. Validity, expiry and renewal
A Charter Mark is valid for one year from issue. It renews annually while the organisation's subscription remains active and the certification requirements continue to be met. Certified information must be kept current; material changes to the certified system must be notified to us and may require re-assessment.
7. Suspension and withdrawal
We may suspend (temporarily unpublish) or withdraw / revoke a Charter Mark where: certification requirements are no longer met; the mark is misused or misrepresented; information provided was materially false or incomplete; a required change was not notified; or the subscription lapses. A suspended or withdrawn mark is removed from the public registry, and the organisation must stop displaying it. We will give the reason and, where practicable, an opportunity to correct the issue first.Reinstatement. If a suspension's underlying issue is resolved within the mark's remaining validity period, we may republish it rather than requiring a new application from scratch. A withdrawn (revoked) mark, by contrast, does not get reinstated — certifying again requires a fresh application.Audit and investigation rights. At any point during a Charter Mark's validity we may request further information or updated evidence, carry out a verification check, or investigate a complaint about a certified system. A certified organisation must cooperate with a reasonable request within a reasonable time; failure to do so may itself be grounds for suspension. Where we withdraw or revoke a mark following such a review, we may publish a notice of the revocation on the public registry so third parties relying on it are not misled.
8. Complaints, appeals and misconduct reports
We keep three separate tracks, because they aren't the same thing and can call for different handling:Operational complaints — about our service itself (delays, communication, billing, site issues). Use our complaints & appeals form (select “Complaint”) or email [email protected].Certification appeals — disagreeing with a refusal, deferral, suspension, or withdrawal decision on your own application or mark. Use the same form (select “Appeal”). An appeal is reviewed by someone independent of the original decision wherever possible; the review outcome and reasons are recorded. See § 4 above for who performs review today.Misconduct reports — reporting that a certified organisation is misusing the Charter Mark, misrepresenting its certification, or has seriously breached the standard it was certified against, including reports made in the public interest (whistleblowing) by someone inside or outside the organisation. Use the same form (select “Report misconduct”) or email us directly; you don't need to identify yourself, though an anonymous report may limit how far we can investigate or follow up with you. A credible report can trigger a review under § 7 (Suspension and withdrawal) independent of, and without needing, the organisation's cooperation.We aim to acknowledge any of the three within 5 working days and to respond substantively within 30 working days.
9. Public registry and corrections
Certified organisations appear on the public registry with a limited, public-safe record (name, tier, certificate ID, scope, framework version, and dates). Inclusion reflects an assessment at a point in time and does not constitute regulatory approval by any governmental authority. A listing is created in connection with the organisation's certification; an organisation can request a correction, or removal on expiry or revocation, by contacting us.
10. Changes to these rules and to the framework
We may update these rules, the Human Values Framework, and the assessment criteria and methods as the scheme matures, and may introduce or withdraw certification categories — the “Last updated” date above reflects the current version of these rules. Material changes affecting existing certifications will be communicated to the organisations concerned.An issued Charter Mark continues to reflect the framework version recorded on its certificate and registry entry at the time it was issued; a later change to the framework does not by itself invalidate an existing mark, though renewal or re-assessment may be against the then-current version.