DOCS · GOVERNANCE
Conflict Resolution Procedures
Structured processes for addressing disputes within a Kont settlement
KONT-GOV-002 · v1 · UPDATED 2026-04-10 · AHMET TURETMIS, FOUNDER · APPROVED
Document Dependency Map
| Relationship | Documents |
|---|---|
| Prerequisites | KONT-VIS-002, KONT-GOV-001 |
| Feeds into | KONT-GOV-003, KONT-MEM-001 |
| Canonical facts owned | conflict_escalation_path, governance_dispute_track, mediator_training_requirements, community_health_review |
| References from | KONT-GOV-001 (Art. 12), KONT-GOV-003 (§8), KONT-MEM-001 (§7.3 removal) |
Change Log
| Version | Date | Author | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | 2026-04-10 | Ahmet Turetmis, Founder | Initial v1.0 in the new repo. Aligned with KONT-GOV-001 voting thresholds and KONT-MEM-001 removal provisions. |
Contents
1. Philosophy: Conflict as Infrastructure
Disagreement is inevitable in any community that values diversity and genuine participation. Kont does not treat conflict as failure — it treats unresolved conflict as failure. Structured mechanisms for surfacing tension, mediating disputes, and reaching resolution are as essential as plumbing or electricity. They are designed in advance, practised regularly, and continuously improved.
The goal is not harmony. It is the capacity to disagree productively and move forward together. A community that suppresses conflict is fragile; a community that processes conflict is resilient.
2. Scope and Applicability
These procedures apply to all disputes arising within or directly connected to a Kont settlement’s operations, including: interpersonal conflicts between members of any tier; disputes between members and the cooperative or its committees; governance process disputes; Conduct Charter violations; labour contribution disagreements; and financial disputes related to membership.
These procedures do not apply to: purely private matters between individuals that do not affect community function; employment disputes with external contractors (which follow contractual and legal channels through the Ltd. Şti., Tier 5); or criminal matters (which are referred to law enforcement regardless of internal proceedings).
3. Guiding Principles
Voluntary first, structured second. Parties are always encouraged to resolve issues directly before invoking formal processes. But formal processes exist so that power imbalances, avoidance, or communication breakdown do not leave disputes unresolved.
Confidentiality within process. Details of mediation and conflict resolution proceedings are shared only with involved parties and the Conflict Resolution Committee. Outcomes may be communicated to the assembly in anonymised form when systemic patterns are identified.
No retaliation. Retaliation against any person for raising a complaint, participating in mediation, or providing testimony is itself a serious conduct violation subject to these procedures.
Proportional response. The response is calibrated to severity. Minor disagreements are not escalated to formal proceedings; serious violations are not dismissed with informal conversations.
Timeliness. Every stage has defined timelines. Delays beyond stated timelines automatically escalate to the next stage.
Due process. Every person subject to formal proceedings has the right to be heard, to understand the allegations, to respond, and to bring an advocate.
4. The Four-Stage Escalation Path
Interpersonal conflicts and conduct violations follow a structured four-stage path. Most disputes resolve at Stage 1 or 2. Stages 3 and 4 are reserved for persistent or serious matters.
Conflict Resolution Escalation Path
| Stage | Method | Who | Timeline | Outcome if Unresolved |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Direct dialogue | Parties involved | 7 days to attempt; 14 days total | Escalate to Stage 2 |
| 2 | Facilitated conversation | Trained internal mediator | First session within 10 days; up to 3 sessions over 30 days | Escalate to Stage 3 |
| 3 | Mediation panel | 3-member panel (one per party + one neutral) | Hearing within 21 days; recommendation within 7 days | Escalate to Stage 4 |
| 4 | Community assembly | Core Member General Assembly | Hearing within 14 days of Stage 3 recommendation; decision within 48 hours | Binding decision or appeal to external arbitration (removal cases only) |
All timelines are hard deadlines; failure to meet them triggers automatic escalation to the next stage.
Stage 1 — Direct Conversation
Who: The parties to the dispute, without third-party involvement.
Process: The person experiencing the issue approaches the other party directly. The conversation is private, respectful, and focused on specific behaviours and their impact — not on personality or character judgments. Both parties make a genuine effort to understand the other’s perspective and agree on a resolution or behavioural change.
Timeline: Attempted within 7 days of the triggering incident. If resolution is not reached within 14 days, either party may escalate to Stage 2.
Documentation: None required. Parties may keep personal notes.
Stage 2 — Facilitated Dialogue
Who: The parties and a trained internal mediator selected from the settlement’s mediator cohort (see §6).
Process: Either party, or the Conflict Resolution Committee upon becoming aware of an unresolved issue, may request facilitated dialogue. The mediator contacts both parties within 3 days to schedule a session. The mediator facilitates communication, ensures both parties are heard, identifies underlying interests, and guides the parties toward a mutually acceptable agreement. The mediator does not impose a solution.
Timeline: First session within 10 days of the request. Up to three sessions over no more than 30 days. If unresolved, the mediator files a brief summary (no personal judgments) with the Conflict Resolution Committee and either party may escalate to Stage 3.
Documentation: The mediator prepares a brief confidential summary noting: issue category, number of sessions, and outcome (resolved / partially resolved / unresolved). Specific content of discussions is not recorded.
Stage 3 — Mediation Panel
Who: The parties; a panel of three mediators (one selected by each party, one selected by the Conflict Resolution Committee); optionally an external mediator if internal resources are insufficient.
Process: The panel conducts a structured hearing. Each party presents their perspective and may bring an advocate (another community member; not a legal professional at this stage). The panel may interview witnesses and review relevant records. The panel deliberates and issues a written recommendation within 7 days of the hearing.
The recommendation may include specific behavioural requirements, a timeline for compliance, and consequences for non-compliance.
Binding or advisory: The panel’s recommendation is binding for conduct matters within the Conduct Charter’s scope. For matters requiring structural action (membership status changes, financial adjustments), the recommendation is advisory and referred to the appropriate body (Membership Committee, General Assembly).
Timeline: Panel hearing within 21 days of escalation. Written recommendation within 7 days of the hearing.
Stage 4 — Community Assembly
Who: The full Core Member General Assembly, the parties, and the Conflict Resolution Committee.
Process: Invoked only when Stage 3 fails to produce resolution, when the dispute involves structural governance questions, or when removal proceedings are initiated. The Conflict Resolution Committee presents the case history and Stage 3 recommendation. Both parties address the assembly. The assembly deliberates and decides by the voting thresholds specified in KONT-GOV-001 Article 5.4.
For removal cases, the specific due process requirements in KONT-MEM-001 §7.3 apply, including the 75% supermajority requirement and the right of appeal to independent arbitration.
Timeline: Assembly hearing within 14 days of the Stage 3 recommendation. Decision recorded and communicated within 48 hours.
5. Governance Disputes: Separate Track
Disputes concerning governance processes — challenges to assembly decisions, board actions, committee composition, election procedures, or bylaw interpretation — follow a separate track with defined timelines to prevent indefinite gridlock.
5.1 Process
Any Core Member may file a governance dispute by submitting a written complaint to the Conflict Resolution Committee specifying: the decision or action challenged; the grounds (procedural irregularity, bylaw violation, or violation of Core Principles); and the remedy sought.
The Committee has 7 days to review and either dismiss (with written reasons) or convene a governance review panel of three Core Members not involved in the disputed decision. The panel issues a recommendation within 14 days:
- If a procedural irregularity is found: recommend the decision be reconsidered with corrected procedures.
- If a bylaw violation is found: recommend the decision be annulled.
The assembly votes on the panel’s recommendation at the next regular meeting.
5.2 Timelines
Governance disputes must be filed within 30 days of the challenged decision. Total resolution timeline from filing to assembly vote must not exceed 60 days. If the Committee or panel fails to act within their timelines, the matter is automatically placed on the next assembly agenda.
6. Mediator Training and Selection
6.1 The Mediator Cohort
Each settlement maintains a cohort of at least six (6) trained internal mediators, rotating on staggered two-year terms. Mediators are Core Members or Residents who have completed a minimum 40-hour training programme in conflict mediation, active listening, non-violent communication, and restorative practices. Training is provided by the settlement or by external professionals contracted through the Kont network.
6.2 Selection
Mediator candidates self-nominate or are nominated by other members. The Conflict Resolution Committee reviews candidates for temperament, community trust, and availability. The General Assembly confirms appointments. No person may serve as mediator in a case where they have a personal interest or close relationship with either party. If no unbiased internal mediator is available, an external mediator is engaged at the cooperative’s expense.
6.3 Continuing Development
Mediators participate in annual refresher training and periodic peer review sessions. The Conflict Resolution Committee maintains anonymised case statistics to identify training gaps and systemic patterns.
7. Annual Community Health Review
Once per year, the Conflict Resolution Committee conducts a community health review: a structured assessment of systemic tensions, relationship patterns, and governance friction.
7.1 Process
The review includes: an anonymous survey distributed to all Core Members and Residents; optional one-on-one interviews with willing participants; a review of anonymised case statistics from the past year; and an assessment of governance process health (participation rates, decision-making satisfaction, committee effectiveness).
The Committee synthesises findings into a public report presented to the General Assembly. The report identifies systemic patterns (not individual disputes) and recommends structural adjustments: changes to committee composition, governance process tweaks, Conduct Charter amendments, labour system adjustments, or targeted programming (workshops, facilitated discussions, skill-building).
7.2 Timing
The review is conducted in Q4 of each fiscal year. Results are presented at the Annual General Assembly. Recommendations are acted upon in Q1 of the following year.
8. Documentation and Records
The Conflict Resolution Committee maintains confidential records of all formal proceedings (Stages 2–4 and governance disputes). Records include: case number and date; parties involved (identified by member ID, not name, in aggregated statistics); issue category; stage reached; outcome; and timeline compliance.
Records are retained for five (5) years and then destroyed. Individual case files are accessible only to the Committee, the parties involved, and (upon appeal) the independent arbitration panel. Anonymised aggregate statistics are shared with the General Assembly as part of the annual community health review and with the inter-settlement network council for cross-network pattern recognition.
9. External Resources
The settlement maintains relationships with external conflict resolution professionals, legal counsel, and mental health professionals who can be engaged when internal capacity is insufficient. The Conflict Resolution Committee maintains a current list of vetted external resources. Costs for external mediation are borne by the cooperative, not by individual parties, to ensure that access to resolution is not contingent on personal financial resources.
In cases involving potential criminal conduct, the Committee coordinates with legal counsel and, where legally required, with law enforcement authorities. Internal proceedings do not replace or delay legal obligations.
10. Document Hierarchy
In the event of apparent conflict between governance documents, the hierarchy of precedence is:
- Cooperative Bylaws (KONT-GOV-001)
- Membership Framework (KONT-MEM-001)
- Conduct Charter (KONT-GOV-003)
- These Conflict Resolution Procedures (KONT-GOV-002)
11. Amendment
These procedures may be amended by the Core Member General Assembly through a two-thirds (⅔) supermajority vote (Structural decision under KONT-GOV-001 Art. 5.4). The Conflict Resolution Committee may propose amendments based on patterns observed in casework and annual reviews. Proposed amendments must be circulated at least fourteen (14) days before the vote.
Amendments to the four-stage escalation path (§4) or the due process requirements for involuntary removal require a three-quarters (¾) supermajority.
Decisions Log
| # | Date | Decision | Rationale | Decided by |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| D-1 | 2026-04-10 | Four-stage escalation: Direct → Facilitated → Panel → Assembly | Graduated response prevents both under- and over-reaction; 90% of intentional community conflicts resolve at Stages 1–2 | Ahmet Turetmis, Founder |
| D-2 | 2026-04-10 | Separate governance dispute track with 60-day hard ceiling | Prevents governance gridlock from paralysing operations | Ahmet Turetmis, Founder |
| D-3 | 2026-04-10 | Minimum 6 trained mediators per settlement | Ensures unbiased mediator availability even with recusals | Ahmet Turetmis, Founder |
| D-4 | 2026-04-10 | Annual community health review in Q4 | Preventive surfacing of systemic tensions before they become personal crises | Ahmet Turetmis, Founder |
| D-5 | 2026-04-10 | Lock as canonical v1.0 in the new repo | Clean-slate versioning aligned with the April 2026 rebuild | Ahmet Turetmis, Founder |
References
- KONT-VIS-002 — Core Principles & Values — Principle 15: Conflict as Infrastructure
- KONT-GOV-001 — Cooperative Bylaws — Article 5.4 voting thresholds, Article 7.1 Conflict Resolution Committee, Article 12 dispute resolution
- KONT-GOV-003 — Conduct Charter — behavioural standards enforced through these procedures
- KONT-MEM-001 — Membership Framework — §7.3 involuntary removal due process
— End of Conflict Resolution Procedures —