A blockchain constitution - a new chapter in the governance of cryptocurrency networks
The cryptocurrency world increasingly draws on concepts familiar from constitutional law. The latest dispute between Charles Hoskinson, the creator of Cardano, and the Ethereum community illustrates this trend perfectly. In March 2025, the Ethereum Foundation published a document setting out the direction of the ecosystem's development, which immediately provoked a reaction from the rival project.
Hoskinson was quick to point out that Cardano had already adopted a formal network constitution in December 2024 at a global convention at the University of Buenos Aires. The document regulates how the network operates and its governance system, setting a precedent in the world of decentralised technologies.
For lawyers and entrepreneurs working in the blockchain sector, this debate matters far beyond a technological dispute between two projects. It raises a fundamental question: do decentralised networks need quasi-legal governance frameworks and, if so, what legal force can such documents have under existing law?
The answer to this question is becoming ever more important in the context of the European MiCA regulation coming into force and the growing regulatory requirements for entities operating in the digital asset market.
The three pillars of the Ethereum Foundation's mandate - a legal analysis
The document published by the Ethereum Foundation on 13 March 2025 rests on three fundamental principles: subsidiarity, protection of value and temporariness. Each of them has significant implications from the perspective of law and corporate governance.
Subsidiarity as a principle of decentralisation
The principle of subsidiarity assumes that decisions should be taken at the lowest possible level - that is, by the network's users and developers themselves. This is a concept well known in European law and is one of the foundations of how the European Union operates. Its transfer to blockchain technology shows how closely the cryptocurrency world is approaching traditional legal models.
The temporary nature of the foundation - the road to full autonomy
From a legal point of view, the principle of temporariness is particularly interesting. The Ethereum Foundation declares that its role should gradually fade until the network becomes fully autonomous. This raises a number of legal questions:
- Who will assume legal responsibility for the operation of the network once the foundation is dissolved?
- How should disputes be resolved in a network without a central managing entity?
- Can decentralised autonomous organisations (DAOs) effectively replace traditional legal structures?
- What tax and regulatory consequences does such a transformation entail?
- Is this model compliant with the MiCA regulation requirements on the identifiability of responsible entities?
These are questions to which Polish law does not yet give clear answers, but which will certainly be the subject of growing legal debate in the coming years.
Cardano versus Ethereum - two models of blockchain governance
The dispute between Hoskinson and the Ethereum community reveals a fundamental difference in approach to blockchain network governance. Both models have their advantages and disadvantages, and analysing them provides valuable lessons for Polish entrepreneurs and investors as well.
In the Cardano model, the key role is played by the constitutional committee - a body that can block changes that breach the principles set out in the network's constitution. This solution is similar to a traditional constitutional court, which examines whether proposed changes comply with the overriding document. The Cardano constitution, adopted at the convention in Buenos Aires, is a formal instrument regulating the rights and obligations of ecosystem participants.
Ethereum, by contrast, bases its governance model mainly on the authority of the community and trust in developers. This approach is more flexible, but also less formalised. The absence of clear control mechanisms can cause problems in disputes, particularly where significant assets are at stake.
For investors and entrepreneurs operating in the Polish cryptocurrency market, the choice of ecosystem should take into account not only technical parameters but also the legal certainty arising from the network's governance model. Formalised governance structures can provide an additional layer of protection in the event of disputes.
Cryptocurrency regulation in Poland - what you should know
The debate on blockchain governance does not take place in a legal vacuum. Polish entrepreneurs and investors operating in the cryptocurrency market must take into account growing regulatory requirements, at both national and European level.
The MiCA regulation (Markets in Crypto-Assets), which comes fully into force in 2025, introduces a comprehensive legal framework for the digital asset market in the European Union. It imposes a number of obligations on token issuers and cryptocurrency service providers, including requirements relating to transparency, consumer protection and anti-money laundering (AML).
In the Polish context, the rules on the taxation of cryptocurrencies are also of key importance. Income from trading in digital assets is taxed at a rate of 19% as income from capital gains. Correctly accounting for transactions requires precise documentation and knowledge of the applicable regulations.
In addition, entities carrying out activities involving virtual currencies are required to be entered in the register of virtual currency activities kept by the Director of the Tax Administration Chamber in Katowice. Failure to comply with this obligation may result in criminal penalties.
The future of blockchain governance - legal challenges on the horizon
The dispute between Cardano and Ethereum is merely the tip of the iceberg. As blockchain technology moves into mainstream finance and business, the issues of governing decentralised networks will increasingly attract the attention of lawyers, regulators and courts.
The key challenges include determining the legal status of a blockchain constitution, the liability of participants in decentralised autonomous organisations, and jurisdiction in cross-border disputes concerning distributed networks. These are issues that require specialist legal knowledge combining an understanding of the technology with a thorough grasp of the regulations.
Whether you invest in Cardano, Ethereum or other digital assets, professional legal support is an essential element of operating safely in the cryptocurrency market. Rapidly changing regulations and the absence of a clear line of case law mean that interpreting the rules yourself involves significant risk.
Do you need legal support with cryptocurrencies, blockchain or MiCA regulation? Contact our firm - our specialists will help you navigate the dynamic world of digital assets safely. We offer comprehensive legal advice covering regulatory and tax matters, as well as the governance of blockchain projects.
Have a question about this?
The first consultation is free - let us talk about your situation.
