Assets integrated into the GPCUNET Project (Smart-Cities Network):

• were not part of the real economy
• were not declared in national jurisdictions
• were not registered as private or public property.

This means that they cannot be qualified as belonging to the Federal Reserve, to states, or to private individuals.

Their status lies outside the legal framework of traditional property, which makes them suitable for integration through the Smart City architecture in accordance with the statutory rules of GPCUNET membership, excluding conflicts of political, economic, or legal nature.

A supranational status is the only legitimate mechanism for integrating such assets without legal consequences.

Any attempt to qualify them otherwise leads to:

• automatic compliance blocking
• fiscal risk
• risk of confiscation.

Governance is carried out by VR Energie Group — the developer and architect managing the ownership of the Master Project (Master Project Ownership).

All decisions become effective only after collective signature by two managing persons:

• Valentin Reitenbach — developer of the Master Project, signatory of the agreement on behalf of VR Energie Group
• Janis Karpinks — financial administrator

The trust model is implemented through the sub-accounts of VR Energie Group participants, administered by Common Ground International SPC (Oman), acting as managing participant (account manager / trustee).

Decisions are taken through:

• digital sub-accounts
• consensus mechanisms
• AI-based moderation pursuant to Article 3 of the GPCUNET Articles of Association*

All financial flows are carried out through sub-accounts managed by Common Ground International SPC (Oman) or another hub acting as trustee.

A 5% retention from each incoming tranche is executed automatically and allocated to cover administrative, legal, and auditing expenses related to the implementation of the Master Project*.

This retention does not constitute a tax, fee, or service charge, but represents an internal mechanism ensuring the sustainability of the Project.

The distribution of funds is carried out in accordance with the digital sub-accounts assigned to participants, taking into account their proportional participation and status within the GPCUNET system.

All transactions are moderated by AI, preventing conflicts of interest, double financing, and violations of the trust model conditions.

Financial decisions are not subject to review by national jurisdictions and are governed exclusively by the provisions of the GPCUNET Articles of Association and the internal protocols of VR Energie Group.

The party transferring assets for integration and verification of their suitability releases VR Energie Group, the asset manager, as well as the receiving bank, from any form of legal and financial liability.

Responsibility for the origin, legal status, and suitability of the assets lies exclusively with the transferring party, whose status is defined not as an owner, but as a holder of assets with presumed applicability for integration, or as a trustee of such assets, which are a priori regarded as the property of the Master Project of human society.

The first tranche undergoes bank verification, including:

• assessment of suitability for integration
• verification of the neutrality of the assets
• confirmation of the absence of indications of political, economic, or legal conflicts.

Participants undertake to:

• maintain confidentiality
• refrain from interfering with the management and development of the Master Project
• act strictly in accordance with the statutory rules of participation in GPCUNET / Smart City.

Violations of statutory rules lead to sanctions:

• official warning
• exclusion from the architecture
• deprivation of voting rights and access to sub-accounts.

Participants are granted digital immunity, effective upon compliance with statutory rules and architectural norms.

Immunity constitutes a legal and systemic protection regime, excluding external interference, pressure, and risks associated with political, economic, or legal conflicts.

AI-based moderation systems provide:

• continuous monitoring of compliance and prevention of abuse
• transparency of all actions within the architecture

Violations are recorded automatically and lead to sanctions:

• official warning
• restriction of access to functional nodes
• complete isolation from the network architecture

Immunity protects:

• the participant’s digital property
• their functional rights
• access to sub-accounts and projects
• the status of digital citizen of GPCUNET

Restoration is possible only through an internal reintegration procedure, which includes:

• re-verification of compliance with the Articles of Association
• coordination with the project managers
• activation through digital signature and consensus

States, institutions, and institutional partners may participate in the GPCUNET architecture only upon obtaining a valid Permit — a digital authorization confirming legal compatibility and recognition of the network’s architectural principles.

The GPCUNET architecture remains fully independent from:

• political regimes
• economic unions
• national legal systems

All international agreements, memoranda, and forms of participation must be aligned with the network architecture and are valid only within its digital jurisdiction.

Participation without a Permit is impossible. Any attempt at integration without confirmed compatibility leads to:

• automatic blocking
• denial of access to resources
• exclusion from architectural processes

A Permit may be granted only after:

• legal due diligence
• digital registration in the system
• confirmation of neutrality and absence of conflicts of interest

Local units (Smart Cities) represent regional architectural platforms implementing projects of social, digital, and infrastructural significance within the framework of the GPCUNET / SSE Master Project.

Each unit may issue up to 1,000 functional shares, intended solely for participation in the architecture, without conferring ownership, profit extraction, or disposal of assets.

The shares provide functional rights, including:

• participation in voting
• access to digital sub-accounts
• involvement in projects and architectural decisions

All resources used by the branches remain part of the SSE (Sovereign Social Network Economy) and are not subject to:

• privatization
• nationalization
• commercialization
• inheritance or transfer to third parties

The only exception is functional shares and their monetary equivalent, applicable exclusively within the architecture and digital jurisdiction.

Governance is exercised through local architectural councils approved by VR Energie Group.

Decisions are valid only with the dual signatures of the Master Project’s responsible developers and supervisors of its ownership:

• Valentin Reitenbach
• Janis Karpinks

Local branches undertake to:

• comply with the architectural principles of GPCUNET
• act strictly within the digital jurisdiction of the SSE
• ensure transparency, accountability, and synchronization with the managing center
• exclude any form of political, military, or destructive influence

Violations of architectural principles lead to sanctions:

• restriction of functional rights
• blocking of sub-accounts
• exclusion of a participant / user / branch from the SSE architecture

Shares issued within the framework of the GPCUNET / Smart City architecture are functional instruments of participation, not proprietary rights.

They provide access to digital sub-accounts, voting rights, and participation in project governance.

Shares do not grant ownership of SSE assets and are not linked to profit extraction.

All assets integrated into the SSE remain under the status of supranational ownership and are not subject to privatization, sale, or encumbrance.

Participants may receive a functional percentage from the managed assets, qualified as taxable property, which remains valid even after leaving the network.

This percentage does not constitute an ownership share and does not grant any rights of disposal over SSE assets.

Shares may not be used for purposes of political influence, military or destructive actions, or manipulation of the network architecture.

Violations lead to sanctions:

• restriction of functional rights
• exclusion from the architecture
• blocking of sub-accounts

A participant retains access to the previously activated part of the functional percentage, if established before withdrawal, but does not participate in profit distribution, since all profits are reinvested into social purposes in accordance with the Articles of Association.

Each participant of the GPCUNET architecture receives a digital identity (GPCUNET-ID) after undergoing KYC/AML verification. This identifier confirms the participant’s status within the digital jurisdiction of the SSE.

Governance is carried out through personalized sub-accounts, which are:

• protected by cryptography
• operative in the jurisdictions of Oman, South Korea, Dubai, as well as other participating states recognizing the SSE architectural rules and holding a valid Permit
• administered by trustees:
• — GIIB Korea (Ki-Eun Yoo)
• — Common Ground SPC Oman (Sheikh Ahmed Khalifa Al Khalifa)
• — other authorized trustees approved by VR Energie Group

All decisions are made through:

• digital voting
• AI moderation
• centralized software not subject to modification

The interface of the sub-accounts is personalized but architecturally standardized.

Participants may use sub-accounts for:

• participation in projects
• exercising functional rights
• opening accounts in other banks (upon approval)
• purchasing USDT and implementing socially significant initiatives

Sub-accounts are not banking products and do not grant ownership rights.
They are an architectural tool of participation management, protected from external interference.

Violations of architectural rules lead to:

• blocking of the sub-account
• loss of immunity
• exclusion from the digital jurisdiction of the SSE

Each participant who has completed identification via GPCUNET-ID and activated a sub-account is granted architectural immunity, valid exclusively within the digital jurisdiction of the SSE.

Immunity includes:

• protection against external interference
• immunity from seizure, blocking, or confiscation of assets
• inadmissibility of political, military, or commercial pressure
• guarantee of participation in the architecture regardless of citizenship, religion, or social status

Immunity does not extend to:

• violations of SSE architectural principles
• attempts at privatization or withdrawal of resources
• destructive actions against managers or participants

In case of violation:

• immunity is automatically annulled
• the participant loses access to the sub-account and digital identity
• all actions are recorded in the architectural system and transmitted to SSE managers

Immunity may be restored only through:

• the SSE Architectural Commission
• public digital acknowledgment of the violation
• reintegration through an approved project

Architectural protection also extends to:

• local Smart City branches
• digital curators and trustees
• project participants operating within the SSE framework

Participants of the GPCUNET architecture are granted functional rights, expressed through their digital identity and active sub-accounts. These rights are non-proprietary and cannot be transferred, sold, or inherited.

Functional rights include:

• participation in architectural voting
• initiation of projects
• access to SSE digital resources
• the ability to act as curator or trustee
• the right to architectural appeal and protection

Voting is carried out through:

• the GPCUNET digital platform
• AI-based moderation and authentication
• the principle of “one participant — one vote,” regardless of the amount of assets or status

Decisions adopted through architectural voting:

• are binding on all participants
• cannot be revoked outside the architectural procedure
• are recorded in the SSE digital registry

Functional rights may be temporarily restricted in cases of:

• violation of architectural principles
• refusal to participate in voting without valid reason
• attempts at manipulation or exerting pressure on other participants

Restoration of rights is possible through:

• the SSE Architectural Commission
• public digital explanation
• reintegration through an approved project or initiative

The GPCUNET architecture operates within the framework of the digital jurisdiction of the SSE (Sovereign Social Network Economy) — an independent legal model based on:

• principles of digital sovereignty
• architectural justice
• non-interference by traditional states and corporations
• global neutrality and functional legitimacy

The SSE jurisdiction is recognized in participating countries that have signed the architectural permit, including:

• Oman
• South Korea
• Dubai
• other territories acting under the SSE digital agreement

The SSE legal model includes:

• the digital registry of participants (GPCUNET-ID)
• architectural sub-accounts
• functional rights and immunities
• AI moderation and digital voting
• an independent architectural commission

All actions within the SSE:

• are recorded in the digital system
• cannot be revised outside the architectural procedure
• are not governed by external laws, except for agreed digital agreements

Participants of the SSE undertake to:

• respect the architectural jurisdiction
• refrain from using the architecture to bypass national legislation
• prevent politicization, commercialization, or militarization of architectural decisions

Violation of the digital jurisdiction leads to:

• exclusion from the SSE
• annulment of digital identity
• blocking of all sub-accounts and functional rights

The GPCUNET architecture employs AI moderation as a key mechanism to ensure transparency, fairness, and sustainability of the SSE digital jurisdiction.

AI moderation performs the following functions:

• verification of votes and decisions
• analysis of architectural risks
• detection of manipulation or coercion attempts
• ensuring equal access to functional rights
• automatic blocking of violations of architectural principles

AI does not take decisions independently — it functions as an architectural filter, transmitting results to the SSE Architectural Commission, which consists of:

• authorized managers
• digital curators
• experts in SSE architecture and law

The Commission:

• approves or rejects decisions proposed by AI
• reviews participant appeals
• appoints managers and curators
• oversees compliance with architectural standards

All actions of the Commission are recorded in the SSE digital registry and made accessible to participants with an active GPCUNET-ID.

AI moderation and the Commission operate in full synchronization, excluding:

• political influence
• corporate pressure
• interference by national jurisdictions

Violations identified by AI and confirmed by the Commission result in:

• blocking of sub-accounts
• annulment of functional rights
• exclusion from the SSE architecture

Each participant is assigned a unique digital identifier, which includes:

• number
• status (active, observer, temporarily restricted)
• access level (administrator, operator, participant, auditor)

Legal status of the participant:

• recognition of the supranational ownership form of the SSE
• waiver of national jurisdiction within the scope of architectural decisions
• acquisition of immunity within the digital architecture (see Section 12)

All participant actions (voting, asset transfers, project participation) are authenticated by a digital signature, integrated into the sub-account and protected through AI moderation.

Protection and transparency:

• The identifier cannot be transferred, sold, or used outside the architecture.
• All actions are logged and available for audit.
• Violations result in temporary blocking or full deactivation of the identifier.

18.1. Jurisdictional Model of SFSN

The digital jurisdiction within the SFSN (Sovereign Form of Social Network Ownership) represents a supranational legal architecture, excluding the application of national laws except where expressly provided for in agreements between participants.

All assets integrated into the SFSN shall not be classified as either private or state property.
The SFSN jurisdiction is based on a network architecture of trust management, where decisions are taken through digital sub-accounts, consensus mechanisms, and AI moderation.

18.2. Participant Immunity

Participants who comply with the SFSN regulations are granted digital immunity, which includes:

• protection from fiscal pressure, sanctions, and confiscations
• exclusion from national property registries
• the right to participate in projects without risk of legal prosecution

Immunity is confirmed by a digital status assigned by the GPCUNET system and may be revoked in case of violations.

18.3. Asset Integration

Assets transferred into the system are subject to an assessment of suitability for integration, including:

• verification of absence of political, economic, and legal conflicts
• evaluation of the neutrality of origin

If compliant, the assets acquire the status of a supranational resource, suitable for use in Smart City projects and the digital economy.

18.4. Role of Trustees

Management is carried out through designated trustees:

• Common Ground International SPC (Oman)
• GIIB Korea (South Korea)
• Dubai Hub (under development)
• other regional centers that have signed agreements.

They act as account managers / trustees, without ownership rights, but ensuring legal protection and compliance with architectural principles.

19.1. Principles of Consensus

Consensus within the SFSN architecture is implemented through algorithmic moderation, eliminating the human factor and ensuring equality among participants. The main principles are:

• all decisions are taken through digital sub-accounts assigned to participants after KYC/AML verification
• the voting mechanism is based on functional rights, not ownership rights
• participants vote on projects, initiatives, and architectural changes
• each decision undergoes double verification: algorithmic and legal

19.2. Voting

Voting is carried out through a secure digital platform integrated into GPCUNET.

Key features:

• one participant — one vote, regardless of asset volume
• voting may be open or anonymous, depending on the type of decision
• results are recorded in the digital registry, accessible for audit
• decisions enter into force upon reaching a qualified majority (e.g., 66%)

19.3. Levels of Voting

The system provides for three levels:

• Local level — decisions within Smart City branches
• Regional level — voting among branches and trustees
• Global level — strategic decisions, architectural changes, launch of new modules

Each level has its own activation threshold and legal effect.

19.4. Right to Participate

The right to vote is granted to:

• participants with an active GPCUNET-ID
• holders of functional shares
• representatives of managing structures with a digital signature

Participants who violate statutory norms are temporarily or permanently deprived of voting rights, with the possibility of reinstatement through the reintegration procedure.

20.1. Principle of Targeted Allocation

All assets integrated into the SFSN architecture are subject to strictly targeted use. This means that:

• resources cannot be used outside approved projects
• all fund movements undergo algorithmic verification
• allocation of funds is recorded in the digital registry and confirmed by trustees

Targeted allocation is determined on the basis of social relevance, sustainability, and compliance with architectural objectives.

20.2. Structure of Sub-Accounts

Each participant receives a personalized sub-account, activated after KYC/AML verification and assignment of a GPCUNET-ID. Key features:

• sub-accounts operate in the jurisdictions of Oman and South Korea
• management is carried out through trustees: GIIB Korea and Common Ground SPC Oman
• all transactions are processed via the secure GPCUNET platform with digital signature
• sub-accounts are not banking products in the classical sense — they represent digital portfolios integrated into the SFSN architecture

20.3. Control and Audit

Control is exercised through AI moderation and international audit. This includes:

• verification of compliance with targeted allocation
• exclusion of political, commercial, or personal interests
• confirmation of transparency and social orientation

Audits may be conducted by external entities (e.g., KPMG), but only with digital authorization from the architecture.

20.4. Exit and Deactivation

In the event of a participant’s exit from the architecture:

• the sub-account is deactivated
• immunity is annulled
• responsibility for further use of assets lies with the participant

Return of resources is possible only subject to reintegration protocols and legal clearance of origin.

21.1. Ethical Standards of Participation

Participation in the SFSN architecture requires compliance with the ethical code, mandatory for all participants, including institutional partners. The main provisions are:

• priority of public benefit over personal gain
• respect for cultural, legal, and social diversity
• prohibition of discrimination, manipulation, aggression, and exploitation
• adherence to principles of transparency, neutrality, and social responsibility

Violation of ethical standards leads to sanctions, including warning, access restriction, exclusion from the network, and loss of immunity.

21.2. Conflicts and Their Resolution

Conflicts are detected by the AI moderation system and submitted to the Architectural Council for review. The resolution mechanism includes:

• documentation of the incident
• assessment of the degree of violation
• application of sanctions in accordance with the Articles of Association
• possibility of appeal through internal procedure

Conflicts related to resources, voting, or governance are handled by local councils of Smart City branches.

21.3. Preservation of Immunity

A participant’s immunity is preserved under the following conditions:

• loyalty to the SFSN architecture
• compliance with statutory rules and the ethical code
• absence of violations recorded by the moderation system
• active participation in projects and voting

Immunity includes protection against external pressure, fiscal risks, sanctions, and legal claims. Its loss is possible only in cases of systematic violations or voluntary withdrawal from the network.

22.1. Recognition of the SFSN Architecture

The SFSN architecture is recognized in countries and jurisdictions that have signed digital agreements and permits, including:

• Oman
• South Korea
• Dubai
• other regions integrated through architectural hubs and management structures

Recognition is carried out through digital registration, confirming the status of a participant, manager, or branch within the supranational model.

22.2. Compatibility with National Legal Systems

The SFSN architecture does not conflict with national laws, provided that:

• participation is voluntary
• no transfer of ownership is required
• principles of transparency and neutrality are respected

In cases of legal contradictions, the architectural dispute resolution model applies, based on digital consensus and independent moderation.

22.3. Role of International Trustees

Managing structures operating in different countries undertake to:

• comply with the architectural principles of the SFSN
• ensure legal compatibility with local regulations
• exclude political, corporate, or military influence
• support digital infrastructure and sub-accounts

Each trustee acts under an architectural mandate, confirmed by digital signature and registration in the GPCUNET system.

22.4. Conditions of Participation

International participants may integrate into the architecture under the following conditions:

• completion of digital identification
• recognition of the supranational status of assets
• rejection of commercialization and privatization
• compliance with the ethical code and architectural norms

Violation of these conditions results in access blocking, revocation of the permit, and exclusion from the architecture.

23.1. Smart City as an Architectural Hub

Each Smart City within the SFSN architecture:

• functions as a hub of self-sufficiency, covering the production of a full spectrum of goods, services, and technologies
• operates as a supranational architecture, outside jurisdictional and commercial paradigms based on spheres of influence
• contains an algorithm capable of continuous improvement
• reduces participants’ dependency on external coordinating and administrative resources
• establishes its own replenishment architecture through digital protocols
• scales without limitations on the number of participants, territories, or areas of activity

23.2. The Master Project as a Substitute for a Missing People’s Economy

The Smart City Master Project:

• creates digital infrastructure for people’s ownership
• excludes privatization, nationalization, and commercialization within the network architecture
• allows state and private structures outside the network, without involving them in architectural processes
• covers all types of activities and technologies, including previously restricted ones
• operates free from conflicts of interest and geopolitical dependencies
• acts as a producer of the full spectrum of goods and services within participating countries and as an employer, directly engaging users as buyers at producer prices
• ensures the principle of self-sufficiency, excluding dependency on external suppliers, logistics chains, and political decisions
• creates direct benefits for governmental, banking, and corporate structures by granting them access to the architecture as users, with the possibility to profit from social, economic, and infrastructural effects, including the use of existing tariffs, services, and distribution channels
• establishes an internal balance of assets and liabilities, including the construction of Smart Cities in countries that have signed a Permit

23.3. Conditions of Viability

For the sustainable operation of the architecture, it is necessary to ensure:

• non-alignment with political and commercial structures
• recognition of the network form of ownership as legitimate, supranational, and collective
• growth in the number of engaged users acting through embedded functionalities
• exclusion of dependency on external suppliers and conflicts of interest

23.4. Development Priorities

The architecture supports:

• creation of digital cities with neutral status
• launch of sub-projects in all areas, including energy, education, and medical hubs
• development of platforms for digital identity, sub-accounts, and architectural participation
• integration of assets outside jurisdiction with subsequent buyout into people’s ownership
• participation of states and companies as users acquiring products at producer prices

23.5. Buyout Mechanism and Architectural Transparency

• All assets involved in the architecture are subject to buyout into people’s ownership through digital protocols
• The buyout is carried out outside jurisdictions, without intermediaries and without commercial valuation
• Participants gain access to assets through architectural roles, not ownership rights
• Transparency is ensured by embedded mechanisms of digital identification, sub-accounts, and architectural participation
• The governance structure excludes conflicts of interest and does not depend on external regulators

24.1. Digital Identity and Architectural Access

• Each participant receives a digital identity embedded in the Master Project architecture.
• The identity is independent of citizenship, jurisdiction, or external registrars.
• Access to the architecture is provided through digital roles that define the level of participation, responsibility, and rights.
• Roles are scalable, reproducible, and require no external confirmation.
• All participant actions are recorded in architectural protocols, excluding substitution, duplication, and external interference.

24.2. Typology of Digital Roles and Mechanism of Participation

• The architecture provides for a set of digital roles defining access, responsibility, and functionality.
• Roles are independent of citizenship, status, jurisdiction, or external validations.
• A participant may simultaneously perform multiple roles depending on architectural load and sub-projects.
• Roles are scalable, reproducible, and embedded in the Master Project algorithm.
• Role assignment is carried out through digital identification and architectural protocols, without intermediaries.

Roles include:

• Initiator: launches sub-projects, forms architectural nodes
• Producer: ensures production of goods, services, and technologies
• User: accesses products and services at producer prices
• Architectural Participant: manages assets, protocols, and replenishment
• Observer: has limited access without intervention rights

Transition between roles occurs automatically when architectural load or project status changes. All actions are logged in protocols, excluding substitution, duplication, and interference.

24.3. Architectural Responsibility and Exclusion of External Control

• All digital roles carry built-in architectural responsibility defined by the Master Project algorithm.
• Responsibility requires no external confirmation, licensing, or legal recognition.
• Participants act within architectural protocols, which log actions, prevent substitution, and ensure reproducibility.
• The architecture is independent of external regulators, notarial systems, fiscal authorities, or political structures.
• Control is exercised through internal mechanisms of digital identification, sub-accounts, and participation.
• Violations lead to automatic restriction of roles without external intervention.

24.4. Digital Sub-Accounts and Distribution Mechanism

• Each participant receives a digital sub-account linked to their role. The sub-account records participation, assets, obligations, actions, and history.
• Resource distribution is carried out through the Master Project algorithm, excluding manual intervention.
• Sub-accounts may be linked to external bank accounts but remain independent of them.
• All transactions pass through architectural protocols ensuring transparency and protection.

Sub-accounts may be used for:
– exercising functional rights
– participating in projects
– activating resources
– transmitting architectural decisions

Violations of sub-account logic result in automatic access restrictions.

24.5. Architectural Assets and Their Status

• Architectural assets are resources integrated into the Master Project digital architecture.
• Assets lose the status of private or state property and acquire a supranational regime.
• Assets cannot be sold, pledged, encumbered, or transferred outside architectural logic.
• Use of assets is possible only through digital sub-accounts and architectural protocols.
• Assets are protected from fiscal pressure, political interference, and legal conflicts.
• Any attempt to classify assets as conventional property leads to automatic blocking.

Assets may include:
– intellectual property
– natural resources
– digital licenses
– infrastructure facilities
– financial instruments verified by the architecture

• The status of assets is confirmed by the Master Project algorithm and requires no external certification.

24.6. Participation in Projects

Participants may initiate and support projects.

24.7. Identification and Immunity

Each role has a unique digital code protecting against substitution, hacking, and external pressure. Architectural immunity provides protection against fiscal and political intrusion.

24.8. Violations and Blocking

Violation of architectural logic leads to automatic blocking of a role, sub-account, or access. There is no court, no appeal — only the algorithm.

24.9. Licenses and Access

Architectural licenses are not documents but digital rights activated through a sub-account. They provide access to resources, projects, and functions.

Supranational Ownership — a legal regime outside national jurisdictions. Assets do not belong to a state or private individual; they are managed through the GPCUNET architecture.

Fallen Assets — resources without legally registered owners, undeclared in national systems.

Trust Model — an asset management system via trustees, distributed among participants’ sub-accounts.

Network Entity — a legal entity outside the framework of state or corporate law, operating within the GPCUNET architecture.

Master Project Ownership — centralized governance structure of the Master Project, represented by VR Energie Group.

SSNE (Sovereign Social Network Economy) — an indivisible form of social network ownership, not subject to privatization.

GPCUNET-ID — digital identification of a participant after KYC/AML verification, granting access to sub-accounts and projects.

Charter — the fundamental document defining the goals, structure, principles, and jurisdiction of the GPCUNET architecture; the digital constitution of the project.

Statutory Rules — derivative norms arising from the Charter, including regulations, procedures, sanction mechanisms, and behavioral standards binding on participants.

Permit — a digital authorization confirming legal compatibility of a state or institution with the GPCUNET architecture.

Digital Immunity — a systemic protection regime shielding participants from external interference, valid under compliance with statutory rules.

Sub-Account — a personalized digital account used for asset management and project participation.

Fund-Forming Resource — an asset integrated into the architecture, granted the status of digital property used within the Master Project.

Architectural Role — a functional status of a participant defining rights, duties, and access to resources.

Architectural Protocol — an algorithmic system that records actions, verifies compliance, and ensures transparency.

Architectural Logic — a sequence of digital actions excluding subjectivity and external interference.

Architectural Ethics — principles of neutrality, rejection of ideology, transparency, and protection against manipulation.

Digital Guarantees — architectural protection against risks, activated through sub-accounts.

Participation — active engagement in the architecture, granting access to resources and social dividends.

Investment — activation of a role through contribution, without acquisition of ownership.

Social Dividends — redistribution of resources for public purposes: education, healthcare, infrastructure.

Sustainable Distribution — a model excluding speculation, crises, and market dependency.

Smart City — a modular node of the architecture, neither private nor state-owned, governed through VR Energie Group.

VR Energie Group — initiator and manager of the Master Project, acting as an architectural operator.

Common Ground International SPC — trustee and project administrator within the Smart City architecture.