Proposed membership eligibility

Verification design

Four evidence states

A future decision would distinguish evidence quality rather than convert every uploaded statement into a verified claim.

Official

Checked directly against the competent authority, public register or original issuer.

Independently corroborated

Confirmed by an identified independent source where no public official record exists.

Applicant supplied

Provided by an applicant but not independently established; would not become a verified public claim.

Unresolved

Conflicting, incomplete or unverified evidence that blocks the affected conclusion.

Category comparison

Evidence proposed for each relationship

PM · Proposed

Professional Member

Proposed natural-person member of the Swiss association

Entry evidence under consideration

At least three years of relevant full-time-equivalent practice during the previous five years
Official evidence of every legally required occupational authorisation for the activities claimed
Two independent professional references and a documented integrity review

Limit: Would not be a government licence, occupational authorisation, client endorsement or guarantee of an outcome.

OM · Proposed

Organisation Member

Proposed legal-entity member of the Swiss association

Entry evidence under consideration

Official legal-existence and business-identifier evidence
Relevant public licences plus documented service, complaint, conflicts, privacy and supervision controls
An accountable principal meeting any separately approved individual-status requirement

Limit: Would not make any employee, office, subsidiary, affiliate or brand a WIMA member.

PA · Proposed

Professional Affiliate

Proposed contractual programme affiliate; not a member of the Swiss association

Entry evidence under consideration

Relevant current work or a credible route into relevant practice
Identity, current-role and any applicable official authorisation evidence
A reference or employer confirmation

Limit: Would carry no vote, member title or professional credential.

APIA · Proposed

Academic and Public-Interest Affiliate

Proposed contractual programme affiliate; not a member of the Swiss association

Entry evidence under consideration

A substantiated research, teaching, public-administration, journalism or civil-society role
Relevant work and conflict or funding disclosures
Independent corroboration where the role is not publicly verifiable

Limit: Would not confer professional status, a member vote or WIMA endorsement of research.

SA · Proposed

Student Affiliate

Proposed contractual programme affiliate for adults; not a member of the Swiss association

Entry evidence under consideration

Age of at least 18
Current enrolment in a relevant recognised programme
Dated institutional evidence and an integrity declaration

Limit: Would make no claim about practice rights, competence, licence or employment.

Common evidence and decision boundaries

A future applicant would need to establish identity or legal existence through a secure private process, describe each activity and jurisdiction, and identify any legally required external licence. Material restrictions or proceedings would require defined disclosure and a fair opportunity to respond.

Payment, event attendance, donation, sponsorship, referral, nationality, client volume or a former website listing would not establish eligibility. An adverse fact would not become an automatic refusal unless an approved rule made it a mandatory bar. A human decision would consider relevance, recency, seriousness, pattern, remediation and candour.

WIMA would verify an external licence with the competent authority. WIMA could not issue that licence or replace the authority's register.