← Back to catalogue
Published

Border / Customs / Migration

vr.wm-pol-006 · wm-pol-006-border-customs-migration

Coordinate independently mastered border, customs and migration records through explicit jurisdiction profiles and constrained evidence links.

World Models Society, people and institutions SOC.POL.BRD

Bundle → Layer → Finding → Questions Filled

6 bundles · 12 layers · 12 findings · 36 questions

Profile and jurisdiction Define the reusable coordination profile and its authority boundaries.

Profile identity and participation context

Proposed profile revisions declare which domains participate; a profile may cover goods only or people only.

Profile identity and participation

Proposed profile revisions declare which domains participate; a profile may cover goods only or people only.

  1. Which stable profile identity and revision distinguish this coordination arrangement? identity
  2. Which person, goods and status roles participate or are explicitly inapplicable? classification
  3. What evidence justifies linking records without assuming a common crossing or shared owner? relationship

Jurisdiction and competence context

Record applicable territory, procedure and authority references independently for each domain; physical location does not alone settle legal competence.

Jurisdiction and competence

Record applicable territory, procedure and authority references independently for each domain; physical location does not alone settle legal competence.

  1. Which jurisdiction, customs territory and effective rule version apply to each linked role? spatial
  2. Which mandate supports the responsible authority and any delegated coordination role? authority
  3. How are conflicting profiles or uncertain applicability held for qualified review? exception
Movement and document interfaces Keep movement observations and document evidence separate from admission authority.

Crossing and itinerary links context

Maintain only references to crossing events and transport context; no local reconstruction of the crossing lifecycle.

Crossing and itinerary links

Maintain only references to crossing events and transport context; no local reconstruction of the crossing lifecycle.

  1. Which external crossing events and transport records does this profile reference? composition
  2. Which event times, directions and locations are reported by those masters, and when were they observed locally? temporal
  3. How are missing, duplicate or contradictory movement references represented without inferring a violation? quality

Travel document evidence links context

Document form and external check assertions are evidence inputs. Neither a successful check nor a document reference is an entry permission.

Travel document evidence links

Document form and external check assertions are evidence inputs. Neither a successful check nor a document reference is an entry permission.

  1. Which issuer-scoped document reference and document profile support this check assertion? provenance
  2. Which external result distinguishes document authenticity, holder binding and an unresolved check? evidence
  3. Which recipient may see the minimum document assertion and under which purpose? privacy
Customs coordination Relate declarations, assessments, controls and goods outcomes while preserving independent authority.

Goods and declaration correlation context

Typed consignment, shipment and declaration links permit goods-only movement and more than one record per consignment.

Goods and declaration correlation

Typed consignment, shipment and declaration links permit goods-only movement and more than one record per consignment.

  1. Which goods shipment, consignment and declaration masters are correlated, and by what evidence? relationship
  2. Which import, export or transit profile and declaration revision are referenced? classification
  3. How is a revised or disputed declaration link superseded without altering the lodged record? lifecycle

Separate customs outcomes context

Release, assessment, payment and other-agency clearance are distinct reported outcomes; a pending final amount need not imply unreleased goods.

Separate customs outcomes

Release, assessment, payment and other-agency clearance are distinct reported outcomes; a pending final amount need not imply unreleased goods.

  1. Which authority records release and which records assessment or payment status? ownership
  2. What conditions, guarantees or pending agency outcomes qualify a reported release? constraint
  3. Which review or post-clearance reference qualifies an earlier customs outcome? state
Status and protection interfaces Keep ordinary status evidence and protection needs separately routed.

Migration and residence status references context

Versioned status evidence does not determine a crossing outcome. Pending applications and unknown status remain distinct from granted or refused status.

Migration and residence status references

Versioned status evidence does not determine a crossing outcome. Pending applications and unknown status remain distinct from granted or refused status.

  1. Which status or application master and issuing jurisdiction supply the reported assertion? identity
  2. Which validity interval and conditions were reported, and is the observation stale? temporal
  3. How does the profile prevent visa possession or application submission from being interpreted as guaranteed admission? validation

Protection safeguards and referral context

Protection needs cannot be collapsed into ordinary entry eligibility. This pattern records only restricted referral and safeguard references.

Protection safeguards and referral

Protection needs cannot be collapsed into ordinary entry eligibility. This pattern records only restricted referral and safeguard references.

  1. Which protection referral route remains available when ordinary documentation or status is unresolved? process
  2. Which policy safeguards address non-refoulement, children and other specific needs in the adopting profile? requirement
  3. Which restrictions prevent harmful disclosure of protection assertions during inter-authority coordination? security
Outcome and review coordination Expose reasons, review routes and asynchronous handoffs without a universal clearance flag.

Decision and remedy references context

Reasoned outcomes and remedy routes remain authority-owned. A local completed task does not establish legally effective notice or finality.

Decision and remedy references

Reasoned outcomes and remedy routes remain authority-owned. A local completed task does not establish legally effective notice or finality.

  1. Which competent decision record supplies the outcome, reasons and subject scope? decision
  2. Which applicable notice and review references identify deadlines and any suspensive effect? requirement
  3. How are partial, contested or reversed decisions displayed without replacing their master history? lifecycle

Coordination handoff state context

Local requested, acknowledged, failed and unknown handoff states refer to evidence exchange only; no transfer of legal responsibility is inferred.

Coordination handoff state

Local requested, acknowledged, failed and unknown handoff states refer to evidence exchange only; no transfer of legal responsibility is inferred.

  1. Which allowed role-to-role handoff is requested and what purpose limits its content? process
  2. What receipt and correlation evidence distinguish acknowledgement from substantive acceptance? event
  3. How are stale, duplicate or conflicting responses held without silently choosing an authoritative outcome? exception
Information governance and mappings Constrain personal and commercial data use and expose mapping limits.

Recipient views and lawful retention context

Access, correction and disposition follow applicable law and role. Local owner consent alone cannot authorize every authority exchange.

Recipient views and lawful retention

Access, correction and disposition follow applicable law and role. Local owner consent alone cannot authorize every authority exchange.

  1. Which traveler, representative, declarant, carrier or authority view is permitted for this purpose? access
  2. What correction, restriction or contested-record route is available without hiding the dispute? quality
  3. Which retention trigger, hold and disposal rule governs each local reference and cached payload? retention

Mapping and coverage validation context

Mappings are proposed alignments. Validate type, version, omissions and uncertainty before accepting a local profile; a shared message format does not harmonize legal effects.

Mapping and coverage validation

Mappings are proposed alignments. Validate type, version, omissions and uncertainty before accepting a local profile; a shared message format does not harmonize legal effects.

  1. Which pinned WCO or travel-document profile maps each typed local reference? interoperability
  2. Which dropped fields, code mismatches and unresolved bindings prevent faithful interchange? validation
  3. What fixtures demonstrate goods-only, undocumented protection and conflicting-status cases without automatic legal decisions? evidence

Classifiers Filled

Family
World Models
Category
Society, people and institutions
Entry kind
pattern
Navigation path
NAV.SOC.POL.BRD
Domain
SOC.POL.BRD
Industry
Cross-industry
Tags
bordercustomsmigrationsoc.pol.brd
Also called
A16

What it is Filled

A reusable coordination pattern, instantiated as a versioned local profile and reference map. It has no universal person-goods-status aggregate root and no shared legal outcome. Only profile bindings, correlation assertions and local review state belong here. Child events, declarations, status decisions and protection cases retain their own identities, authorities and lifecycles.

In scope

  • Versioned jurisdiction and authority profile, domain participation and typed links across independently mastered records
  • Evidence-qualified coordination of person movements, goods formalities and migration or protection referrals
  • Local reference freshness, disputed correlations, recipient-specific views, review routes and mapping validation

Out of scope

  • Creation or lifecycle control of crossing events, customs declarations, goods, persons, travel documents, visas, residence statuses or asylum cases
  • Tariff calculation, biometric matching, risk scoring, entry or removal decisions, declaration filing, detention operations and controlled-item handling instructions
  • Universal legal eligibility, automated enforcement, national-security intelligence, operational system deployment or current-law certification

Why it exists Filled

Coordinate independently mastered border, customs and migration records through explicit jurisdiction profiles and constrained evidence links.

Distinguishing features Derived, awaiting review

  • Unlike WM-POL-028 Border Crossing Event: Incoming candidate EXTEND edge resolves the event part of legacy A16. This pattern owns only the interface role; events retain separate identity and time. Interpret the candidate as profile specialization/alignment, not entity inheritance.
  • Unlike WM-POL-029 Migration / Residence Status: Incoming candidate EXTEND edge resolves the legal-status part of A16. Status validity, rights and transitions remain at the target. A crossing is neither necessary nor sufficient for a status record.
  • Unlike Customs declarations, goods shipments and assessments: Independent masters referenced by role and version. Goods may move without a linked traveler; multiple declarations, revisions and assessments may relate to one movement.
  • Unlike Administrative case, decision, protection and enforcement records: Reference competent-authority outcomes and review routes. No automatic refusal-to-enforcement handoff and no local decision of protection entitlement or legal effect.
  • Unlike Legacy A16 and unreviewed card supplement: Reconciled as leads only. Reject unconditional self-access, boolean-only carrier checks, one-point-one-time root, one assessment per declaration, wildcard imports and inherited conformance claims.

Note: Derived from boundary notes against neighbouring models.

What robots and AI may and may not do Derived, awaiting review

Must not

  • No automated adverse decision, detention procedure or controlled-item operational instruction is provided.
  • Owner approval cannot replace lawful authority or necessary transfer safeguards.
  • Local deletion cannot annul a master decision.
  • Deny by default; require lawful purpose, verified role and field-level permission before following a reference.

Only with a human decision

  • Human-rights and protection issues require qualified policy review.

May

  • Bind a local profile: Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Associate approved jurisdiction and role bindings with a new local profile revision.
  • Link external evidence: Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Record a typed correlation assertion and its basis without copying master lifecycles.
  • Review reference freshness: Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Compare reported times and revisions against the selected local freshness rule.
  • Record handoff evidence: Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Index already authorized external exchange receipts without sending messages or delegating legal competence.
  • Prepare recipient view: Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Prepare a local minimum-data view under verified role, purpose and restrictions; no external disclosure.
  • Validate coordination profile: Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Check role typing, source pins and conflicting assertions, reporting gaps without deciding legal eligibility.

Note: Derived from functions, policies, CRUD and access rules; prohibitions were not authored for agents as such.

Moral aspects Derived, awaiting review

  • Qualified steward for disputes, protection safeguards and retention
  • Owner approval cannot replace lawful authority or necessary transfer safeguards.
  • Review safeguard and referral policy without exposing protected narratives.
  • Privacy and records steward
  • Versioned pattern profile and typed reference assertions; child master identities preserved.
  • Country-specific visa, residence, asylum, customs debt, national-security and law-enforcement privacy regimes are not implemented
  • Child events, declarations, status decisions and protection cases retain their own identities, authorities and lifecycles.

Note: Sentences mentioning harm, privacy, consent or similar, collected from the specification.

Owners Filled

Steward

Accountable public-authority role and coordination mandate; no company or brand is designated owner

Roles

Profile steward
Maintain local role bindings and version review.
Domain authority reviewer
Confirm competence and meaning of target-owned outcomes.
Protection reviewer
Review safeguard and referral policy without exposing protected narratives.
Privacy and records steward
Review access, correction, retention and transfer rules.
Evidence curator
Record source, observation and disputed correlation context.

Links to other meta-models Filled

references

  • WM-POL-028 - Optional binding to separately mastered crossing events; incoming candidate EXTEND means profile specialization, not ownership of events.
  • WM-POL-029 - Optional binding to separately mastered migration status; incoming candidate EXTEND does not make status a property of a crossing.
  • Customs declaration and consignment masters - Bind declarations, goods and assessments by typed external IDs; exact registry targets require adoption review.
  • Administrative decision and protection case masters - Resolve decisions, remedies and protection referrals through competent authorities; local correlation has no legal effect.
  • Person, authority and travel-document masters - Minimize identifying payload and use separately governed master references; target versions remain to be pinned.

aligned

  • WCO Data Model - Conceptual cross-border data alignment only; release-specific message mapping and conformance are deferred.
  • ICAO Doc 9303 - Document-profile alignment only; no biometric verification or technical conformance implementation.

neighbor

  • WM-POL-028 Border Crossing Event - Incoming candidate EXTEND edge resolves the event part of legacy A16. This pattern owns only the interface role; events retain separate identity and time. Interpret the candidate as profile specialization/alignment, not entity inheritance.
  • WM-POL-029 Migration / Residence Status - Incoming candidate EXTEND edge resolves the legal-status part of A16. Status validity, rights and transitions remain at the target. A crossing is neither necessary nor sufficient for a status record.
  • Customs declarations, goods shipments and assessments - Independent masters referenced by role and version. Goods may move without a linked traveler; multiple declarations, revisions and assessments may relate to one movement.
  • Administrative case, decision, protection and enforcement records - Reference competent-authority outcomes and review routes. No automatic refusal-to-enforcement handoff and no local decision of protection entitlement or legal effect.
  • Legacy A16 and unreviewed card supplement - Reconciled as leads only. Reject unconditional self-access, boolean-only carrier checks, one-point-one-time root, one assessment per declaration, wildcard imports and inherited conformance claims.

What else AI and robots need to interact with it Incomplete

Identity and identifiers required Filled

  • Authoritative master-system identifier
  • Governed global identifier or IRI
  • Owner-assigned UUID or ULID

Direct properties not applicable Not applicable

Not applicable

Institutional or informational subject: no invented physical properties.

Recognition optional Missing, in the backlog

Not described yet. This gap is in the card backlog.

Capabilities and actions required Filled

  • Bind a local profile: Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Associate approved jurisdiction and role bindings with a new local profile revision.
  • Link external evidence: Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Record a typed correlation assertion and its basis without copying master lifecycles.
  • Review reference freshness: Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Compare reported times and revisions against the selected local freshness rule.
  • Record handoff evidence: Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Index already authorized external exchange receipts without sending messages or delegating legal competence.
  • Prepare recipient view: Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Prepare a local minimum-data view under verified role, purpose and restrictions; no external disclosure.
  • Validate coordination profile: Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Check role typing, source pins and conflicting assertions, reporting gaps without deciding legal eligibility.

Hazards and failure modes optional Missing, in the backlog

Not described yet. This gap is in the card backlog.

Standards and interfaces required Missing, in the backlog

Not described yet. This gap is in the card backlog.

Context of use required Filled

  • WTO commitments require member-specific applicability and implementation review
  • EU border and data-protection rules are regional examples; GDPR is not asserted to govern every border-processing purpose
  • OHCHR guidance and UNHCR protection material are not a substitute for checking applicable instruments and jurisdiction

Sources Filled

  1. WCO Data Model overview - World Customs Organization
  2. Trade Facilitation Agreement - World Trade Organization
  3. Doc 9303 - Machine Readable Travel Documents - International Civil Aviation Organization
  4. Access to territory and non-refoulement - United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
  5. Recommended Principles and Guidelines on Human Rights at International Borders - Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
  6. Regulation (EU) 2016/399 - Schengen Borders Code - European Parliament and Council of the European Union
  7. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 - General Data Protection Regulation - European Parliament and Council of the European Union
  8. Guidance on the use of Main Class Levels of the WCO Data Model - World Customs Organization

Open questions

  • Obtain complete texts and verify effective legal and technical versions, member implementation schedules, licensing and jurisdiction applicability for every adopted profile.
  • Develop pinned schemas and mappings with goods-only, multiple-assessment, stale-status, conflicting-movement, protection-referral and lawful-erasure fixtures.
  • Restore independent external review and confirm the candidate pattern-specialization bindings before any canonical or operational promotion.
  • Independent second-provider review absent; Claude and Grok skipped under owner waiver
  • Live HTTP and current-version verification pending; several sources available only as official indexed excerpts
  • Country-specific visa, residence, asylum, customs debt, national-security and law-enforcement privacy regimes are not implemented
  • Biometric algorithms, tariff classifications, risk selection, controlled-item procedures and detention operations excluded
  • Nested instance schemas, precise target bindings, mapping fixtures and conformance testing deferred

Machine files

Provenance

world-models research · reviewable-draft

Built from: models/wm-pol-006-border-customs-migration/spec.yaml