Five tiers, and what each one doesn't say

That an identified person created an account, declared a company name, a country and an activity, and signed the registration statement and the anti-trafficking charter.

The declarant's own statements, and nothing else. No document is checked against a registry at this tier.

Neither the company's legal existence, nor the reality of the activity, nor the holding of any permit, nor the quality of what's on offer.

Create an account, sign statement A1 and the charter. A person reviews the registration before it's approved, and a rejection comes with a reason.

That the declared legal entity is registered in its country's business registry, that the declared director is listed there, and that a proof of identity for that director has been matched against the registration.

The national commercial registry or its equivalent, consulted on the date shown on the badge, plus the director's proof of identity.

Nothing about the real activity, breeding capacity, solvency, commercial track record or good faith. A company that exists can still act in bad faith.

Submit a registration extract less than three months old and the director's proof of identity. The tier shows its grant date and its expiry date.

That a mandated qualified third party (avian veterinarian, specialized firm) carried out an on-site inspection or an expanded documentary review, on a given date, within a written scope, and signed its conclusions on its own letterhead and under its own responsibility.

The third party's report, filed with its date, its scope and the identity of its author. It's delivered to the client, not to SaqrBridge.

Today's situation, if the audit is old. An audit records a state on a given date, it says nothing about conduct over time, and it doesn't cover what fell outside its scope.

Commission the audit, accept its scope, price and limits before payment. The tier is dated and must be renewed.

That no upheld report, no dispute proceeding opened on the platform and no public ruling brought to our attention is on record for this organization over the period shown.

Our internal register of reports and case files, plus the public rulings we were able to consult. The scope is strictly limited to what we observe.

The absence of disputes outside the platform. It's an absence of trace on our side, which is not proof of an absence of fact.

It isn't requested. It's earned through tenure and the absence of an upheld report over the period, and it's withdrawn as soon as a report is upheld.