Language:
Home Core Serverless Edition CDS — Constitutional Screening
gateSport — VAR Engine gateMotorsport — Stewarding Engine gateAntiDoping gateTransfer
gateSocialMediaLaws gateMusicCompliance gateClinicalTrials gateRealEstateTransactions gateAgriFoodCompliance gateHeavyIndustry gateEnergyGridCompliance
gateBankingCompliance gateCBDC gateHFT gateConsortiumLoans gateTaxExecution
gateLogistics gateIntralogistics gateRailLogistics gateAviationLaws
gateEsgSocial gateSustainabilityCompliance
gateGovernmentActs gateProcurement gateBundID
Pipeline Gate 0 STFL Enforced Edge Grid CRPG Cybersecurity Data Sources System Documentation
Pricing Due Diligence Machine Law — The Book Institutions Jurisdictions Press FAQ
Quantum Security Defence 🏰 🔍 Search Request Access →
gateEsgSocial — Supplier Social Attestation Gate
// IMMO.QUICK · GATEESGSOCIAL · ESRS S2 · ILO · BSCI · EU RL 2024/1203 · § 30 OWIG N.F.

A supply chain is made of individual statements.

gateEsgSocial forensically seals a single supplier's attestation to a buyer, ILO core conventions, BSCI audit tier, minimum wage, weekly hours, signature, reconstructible for ten years. Support for procurement teams, never a replacement for them.

Request Access → See the architecture
In one sentence: gateEsgSocial seals that a specific supplier attested a specific ESRS S2 data situation to a specific buyer at T=0, it does not verify whether that statement is materially true.
✓ RELEVANT IF...
  • You are a buyer or brand that needs to make individual supplier attestations forensically provable
  • You need to document ILO core conventions, BSCI audit tier, or minimum wage compliance per delivery
× NOT RELEVANT IF...
  • You expect a system to verify or audit the substantive truth of a supplier's statement
  • You want to seal an entire corporate report, not a single attestation, see gateSustainabilityCompliance for that
// The problem

Micro-statement, not macro-aggregate.

A corporate report aggregates. It says nothing about whether a specific supplier made a specific statement about ILO conventions to a specific buyer at a specific time. gateEsgSocial is the layer below, per-supplier-per-transaction, deliberately separate from the corporate level.

// Architecture

Five checkpoints per attestation.

1
ILO Core Conventions
Eight booleans, C029 through C182, all must be true
2
BSCI Audit Tier
A, B, C satisfy, D, E, or NOT_AUDITED are a deficiency
3
Local Minimum Wage
local_minimum_wage_compliant must be true
4
Weekly Hours
Maximum 48 hours, above that a flag or block
5
Supplier Signature
ECDSA-P256, public key and signature must be present
Priority on multiple deficiencies
ILO outranks BSCI outranks minimum wage outranks weekly hours. This order is not ad hoc, it is anchored in the rule version itself and therefore forensically reproducible.

Honesty paradigm: a false on an ILO convention means 'not complied with or not attested'. The gate deliberately does not separate these two cases, a tribunal later treats both as evidence of one of two gaps.

// Examples

Three fully fictional example decisions.

All buyers, suppliers, and values on this page are invented and serve only to illustrate the gate logic.

Complete attestation, sealed
gateEsgSocial · 1–5
A fictional supplier attests all eight ILO conventions as complied with, BSCI tier B, minimum wage met, 44 weekly hours, valid signature.
ilo_core_attestations8/8 true
bsci_audit_tierB
weekly_hours_max44
ESG_SOCIAL_SEALED
Proof, not an assessment. The gate confirms that exactly this statement was made at exactly this time.
ILO convention not met, documentation_only
gateEsgSocial · 1
The same fictional supplier reports C182 as false, in the default documentation-only mode, without dispositive effect.
ILO_C182false
material_block_modefalse
ESG_ATTESTATION_DELTA_FLAGGED
Documented, not prevented. In dispositive mode, the same constellation would have triggered BLOCK_ILO_VIOLATION.
Weekly hours exceeded, dispositive mode
gateEsgSocial · 4
A fictional buyer operates the gate in dispositive mode. A supplier reports 56 weekly hours.
weekly_hours_max56
material_block_modetrue
BLOCK_WORKHOURS_EXCEEDED
T0 choice, forensically anchored. The buyer's mode is anchored in the input hash, a later configuration change does not falsify the original assessment.
Update v1.1.0 — EU Directive 2024/1203 anchored
EU Environmental Crime Directive 2024/1203 and §30(2a) OWiG (new) are anchored as an algorithm-bound normative reference in gateEsgSocial, rule-version-hash-bound in the algoSig and in the applied_norms field of every audit trail. The full SUB-GATE 5 mechanism with a T=0 execution lock lives in gateHeavyIndustry.
⚠ BILL — NOT YET IN FORCE
§30(2a) OWiG (new) is part of the government bill BT-Drs. 21/6133 implementing EU Directive 2024/1203, currently with the Bundestag committees, no entry-into-force date confirmed.
→ See SUB-GATE 5 at gateHeavyIndustry
// Clarification

What gateEsgSocial is not.

  • Not an audit and not legal advice. The gate does not say a supplier's statement is materially true, it seals that it was made.
  • Not a replacement for gateSustainabilityCompliance. A corporate report and a single supplier attestation are structurally different objects of proof.
  • Not a probabilistic AI assessment. Every result is a fixed, deterministically derived value.
  • No certification by amfori BSCI or the ILO. gateEsgSocial claims no official endorsement.

For procurement teams that want to make their supplier attestations provable.

gateEsgSocial is open for conversation with buyers, brands, and suppliers who want to understand how deterministic governance infrastructure translates to ESRS S2.

Request Access → access@immoquick.eu
Request Access →