Editorial standards

LawfulNote organizes public information about migration and asylum. It is not a government service or a law firm. These standards describe publication requirements, not a claim that every article has been professionally reviewed.

Sources and scope

Policy claims should link to the specific original document, identify the authority, jurisdiction and applicable date, and distinguish current rules from historical information. A generic organization homepage is not evidence for a specific claim.

Authorship and review

Only supplied author and review-contact information is displayed. A review contact is not proof of completed review or professional credentials. A content modification date is not a fact-check date.

Each review record identifies the article version and whether it represents automated checks or a recorded human declaration. Automated checks can permit automatic publication; they are not human review. Text revisions or restoring a draft require a new record. An automatic cover-only update can retain an existing human declaration, with its original date and an explanation that the text and sources did not change. None of these records independently verifies identity, qualifications or conclusions.

Fabrication and maintenance

Sources, authors, review credentials and review dates must never be invented, and a date must never be changed merely to make a page look new. Every claim that cannot be confirmed against a document we can point to stays unpublished.

Pre-publication checks compare required fields, date consistency and source URL format. They cannot establish that a source is reachable, that it actually supports the claim, or that a legal interpretation is correct.

Corrections and updates

A correction should identify the article, the disputed passage and a specific supporting source. Policy changes should record what changed and the applicable date. No response time or round-the-clock monitoring is promised.

Contact availability