political-classification-guide.md

May 3, 2026 · View on GitHub

🏷️ Political Classification Guide

📊 Multi-Dimensional Classification for Swedish Parliamentary Events
🎯 Sensitivity · Domain · Urgency · Political Temperature · Strategic Significance

📋 Document Owner: CEO | 📄 Version: 2.5 | 📅 Last Updated: 2026-04-25 (UTC)
🔄 Review Cycle: Quarterly | ⏰ Next Review: 2026-09-01
🏢 Owner: Hack23 AB (Org.nr 5595347807) | 🏷️ Classification: Public

🎯 AI-FIRST Methodology Card

🚦 Read this card before writing a single paragraph. It names the artifact this methodology owns, the gate check it satisfies, the evidence-density target it must hit, and the Pass-1 / Pass-2 discipline required by .github/copilot-instructions.md §5 (AI-FIRST Quality Principle).

Field	Value
Purpose	7-dimension event classification (sensitivity, democratic integrity, policy urgency, economic impact, governance impact, political capital, legislative impact) — Step 3 of the AI-driven pipeline.
Inputs	Per-document analyses (Family E); incoming Riksdag/Government documents; sensitivity policy in `Hack23 ISMS CLASSIFICATION.md`
Outputs	`classification-results.md` (Family A) and per-document classification headers (Family E)
Owning artifact(s)	`classification-results.md`
Owning gate check	Check 1 (existence) + Check 4 cross-reference when classification feeds SWOT/significance
Citation density target	Every classification row cites ≥ 1 `dok_id` and the dimension-specific evidence (e.g. KU document + named MP for Democratic Integrity)
Banned phrases	Enforced via `political-style-guide.md` §Machine-readable banned-phrase list
Threshold source	`reference-quality-thresholds.json` → `thresholds[articleType][artifact]` (fallback `defaults.coreArtifactFloor`)

✅ Pass-1 checklist (creation — minimal viable artifact)

Score every document on all 7 dimensions; do not omit dimensions even when low-impact
Tag sensitivity using the 4-level ladder (Public / Internal / Confidential / Restricted)
Produce every required sub-section listed in the owning template
Add ≥ 1 evidence anchor (dok_id, vote id, named MP, or primary-source URL) per analytical claim
Apply the correct WEP confidence band for the run's horizon (72h / week / month / quarter / year / cycle)
Include ≥ 1 themed Mermaid diagram with style … or themeVariables config (where structurally meaningful)
Cross-link the relevant template under analysis/templates/ and the gate check it satisfies

🔁 Pass-2 checklist (read-back & improve — AI-FIRST mandatory)

Cross-check sensitivity tag against Hack23 ISMS CLASSIFICATION.md for parity
For high-urgency events (Urgency=4-5) confirm forward-indicator coverage in Family D
Re-read the file end-to-end; flag every claim that lacks an evidence anchor and add one
Replace every banned phrase listed in political-style-guide.md §Machine-readable banned-phrase list with an evidence-anchored alternative
Tighten WEP language: never above likely without ≥ 3 cycle-aged sources for year/cycle horizons
Strengthen Mermaid (color-coded style … directives, themeVariables, ≥ 5 nodes where the structure admits it)
Add ≥ 1 second-order effect, cui-bono note, or counterfactual where the artifact admits one
Verify citation density meets the per-file target below and the gate's evidence-density rules

🟢 Exemplar (good — pattern-match this)

(classification row) "H902KU14 — Sensitivity=Public; Democratic Integrity=4 (KU oversight petition, Bergstrand (V) 2026-04-19); Policy Urgency=3; Legislative Impact=2 (committee referral pending). Evidence: riksdagen.se/dok/H902KU14 ([A1])."

🔴 Anti-exemplar (failure mode — never ship this)

(failure mode) "This is an important matter for democratic process." — no dimensions scored, no dok_id, no MP, no sensitivity tag.

🔗 Cross-links

Template(s): analysis/templates/political-classification.md
Gate check: .github/prompts/05-analysis-gate.md
AI-FIRST canon: .github/copilot-instructions.md §5 · ai-driven-analysis-guide.md
Style canon: political-style-guide.md · osint-tradecraft-standards.md
Catalog row: artifact-catalog.md

🔄 Tradecraft Anchors

Element	Value	Reference
F3EAD Stage	FINISH	Classification is the first analytical step after document-identity establishment
PIRs Served	Classification outputs feed PIR prioritization — high Democratic Integrity → PIR-7; high Coalition Impact → PIR-1	See `political-style-guide.md` §PIR/EEI Catalog
Admiralty Floor	Classification claims require ≥[A1] (primary document) plus ≥[B2] context	See `political-style-guide.md` §Admiralty Code
WEP Requirement	Strategic Significance Assessment uses WEP language for probability of impact	See `political-style-guide.md` §WEP + ODNI
ICD 203 Gate	Standard 1 (source quality), 8 (accurate judgments)	See `political-style-guide.md` §ICD 203
SAT(s)	Quality of Information Check	See `political-style-guide.md` §SATs

🎯 Purpose

This guide provides the authoritative multi-dimensional classification methodology for Swedish parliamentary events processed by Riksdagsmonitor's agentic workflows. Classification is the first analytical step — all subsequent risk assessment, threat analysis, and significance scoring depend on accurate initial classification.

Beyond basic sensitivity/domain/urgency, this methodology includes:

Political Temperature Index — a composite score measuring how politically heated an event is
Strategic Significance Assessment — evaluating long-term importance vs. short-term news value
Coalition Impact Vector — which direction does this push coalition dynamics?

This methodology is inspired by Hack23 ISMS CLASSIFICATION.md. See reference/isms-classification-adaptation.md for the full mapping.

🔒 Sensitivity Levels

Political sensitivity levels are analogous to ISMS confidentiality levels, adapted for a public transparency platform:

graph TD
    A[Incoming Event] --> B{Contains legally sensitive<br/>personal/security data?}
    B -->|Yes| C[🔴 RESTRICTED]
    B -->|No| D{Politically charged:<br/>coalition threat, allegation,<br/>ongoing investigation?}
    D -->|Yes| E[🟡 SENSITIVE]
    D -->|No| F[🟢 PUBLIC]
    
    C --> G[Requires editorial review<br/>before publication]
    E --> H[Requires careful framing<br/>and attribution]
    F --> I[Freely publishable<br/>in standard workflow]
    
    style C fill:#FFEBEE,stroke:#D32F2F
    style E fill:#FFFDE7,stroke:#FFC107
    style F fill:#E8F5E9,stroke:#4CAF50

🟢 PUBLIC

Definition: Routine parliamentary activity that is fully public record, non-controversial, and freely publishable without additional editorial controls.

Examples:

Standard committee betänkanden (committee reports) without partisan controversy
Routine interpellationer with standard ministerial responses
Published SOU (Statens offentliga utredningar) reports
Budget implementation reports with no surprise findings
New legislation that passed with broad cross-party support

ISMS Analogy: Public / TLP:WHITE — no restrictions on distribution

🟡 SENSITIVE

Definition: Events that are politically charged, involve ongoing controversies, contain allegations against named politicians, or could be misrepresented without careful framing.

Classification Triggers (any one is sufficient):

Event directly threatens coalition stability
Named politician faces formal allegation or KU granskning
Sensitive migration, crime, or security policy dimensions
Significant partisan disagreement between coalition partners
EU compliance concerns raised
Budget figures significantly different from projections

ISMS Analogy: Internal / TLP:GREEN — share within editorial team only

🔴 RESTRICTED

Definition: Events with legal sensitivity, active security dimensions, potential personal data exposure, or that could cause direct harm if published without expert review.

Classification Triggers:

Active criminal investigation involving a politician
National security information (defence, SÄPO)
Personal data of private individuals (not politicians acting in public role)
Information subject to ongoing court proceedings (rättegång)
Content that may constitute defamation without additional verification

ISMS Analogy: Confidential / TLP:RED — editorial review mandatory before any publication

📋 Policy Domain Taxonomy

⚠️ Title-Only Classification Warning: Domain classification from document titles alone has a ~40% error rate (observed 2026-04-15: housing motions misclassified as labour, asylum motions misclassified as insurance). Title-only classification is LOW confidence. To achieve MEDIUM or higher confidence, the classifier MUST read the document summary or full text via get_dokument_innehall. When only the title is available, classification MUST include the label [LOW confidence — title only].

Sweden's 13 parliamentary domain codes, aligned with Riksdag committee structure:

ECO – Economics & Finance (FiU oversight)
- Budget process
- Taxation
- Monetary policy
DEF – Defence & Security (FöU oversight)
- Military capability
- NATO commitments
- Civil defence
JUS – Justice & Law (JuU oversight)
- Criminal law
- Courts
- Police reform
SOC – Social Policy (SoU oversight)
- Welfare benefits
- Pension system
- Disability rights
HEA – Health (SoU/HEaU oversight)
- Healthcare funding
- Public health
- Pharmaceuticals
EDU – Education (UbU oversight)
- School reform
- University funding
- Research policy
ENV – Environment (MJU oversight)
- Climate targets
- Biodiversity
- Water quality
AGR – Agriculture (MJU/NäU oversight)
- Farm subsidies
- Food security
- Fishing rights
INF – Infrastructure (TU oversight)
- Transport
- Housing
- Digital infrastructure
ENE – Energy (NäU oversight)
- Nuclear policy
- Renewable targets
- Grid capacity
FOR – Foreign Affairs (UU oversight)
- EU relations
- Bilateral treaties
- NATO coordination
MIG – Migration (SfU oversight)
- Asylum policy
- Integration
- Border control
CON – Constitution (KU oversight)
- Electoral law
- Government formation
- Parliamentary procedure

Domain Assignment Rules

Always assign a primary domain — if ambiguous, choose the domain of the lead committee
Secondary domains are optional but recommended when event touches multiple areas
CON (Constitution) takes precedence as primary when constitutional norms are at stake
DEF (Defence) takes precedence for national security events regardless of secondary domain
When in doubt, check which Riksdag committee (utskott) has jurisdiction

⏰ Urgency Matrix

Urgency is assessed against the Swedish legislative calendar and real-world impact timelines:

Urgency Level	Legislative Trigger	Real-World Trigger	Max Delay to Classify
⚪ ROUTINE	Motion filed; SOU published	No immediate action required	24–48 hours
🔵 ELEVATED	Committee report published; debate scheduled	Government response expected within 2 weeks	4–8 hours
🟠 URGENT	Vote scheduled within 48 hours	Immediate government or policy action required	1–2 hours
🔴 CRITICAL	Constitutional crisis; emergency session called	Acute national security or democracy event	Immediate

Swedish Legislative Calendar Markers

Key dates that automatically elevate urgency:

September 20: Budget Proposition (Budgetproposition) — ELEVATED minimum
October: Committee review period — ROUTINE unless contested
November: Riksdag budget vote — URGENT minimum for budget items
April: Spring Amending Budget — ELEVATED minimum
June: Spring session close — ELEVATED for pending legislation
September (election year): Riksdag election — CRITICAL political environment

Election 2026 Urgency Boosts

In the 12 months before September 2026, apply urgency boost rules for electoral sensitivity:

Document Type	Normal Urgency	Election-Year Boost	Boost Condition
Budget propositions	ELEVATED	URGENT	Within 6 months of election
Coalition agreements / breakdowns	URGENT	CRITICAL	Any time
Welfare, healthcare, migration policy	ROUTINE/ELEVATED	+1 tier	Voter salience > HIGH
Criminal justice reform	ELEVATED	URGENT	If sentencing/police scope is national
Constitutional amendments	ELEVATED	CRITICAL	Any time
Government confidence votes	CRITICAL	CRITICAL	No boost needed — always CRITICAL
Ministerial appointments/resignations	ELEVATED	URGENT	Within 3 months of election

Boost rationale: Electoral proximity makes politically salient events more consequential for public discourse and editorial routing. Analysts MUST apply the election-year boost and document the rationale.

📊 Impact Scope Assessment

Use the following evidence-based criteria to assign impact scope:

Scope	Geographic	Affected Population	International Dimension
🏘️ LOCAL	Single municipality/region	<100,000 affected	None
🇸🇪 NATIONAL	Whole of Sweden	100K–10.5M affected	None or minor
🇪🇺 EU	Sweden + EU implications	Swedish + EU dimension	EU directive, ECJ, Commission
🌍 INTERNATIONAL	Global dimension	International treaty	NATO, UN, bilateral

🤖 Automated Classification (Scripts Reference)

The following scripts provide automated first-pass classification:

Script	Function	Output
`scripts/analysis-framework/index.ts`	Main analysis pipeline entry	Classification JSON
`scripts/analysis-framework/lenses/citizen.ts`	Citizen impact lens	Sensitivity indicator
`scripts/analysis-framework/lenses/economic.ts`	Economic domain classifier	Domain codes
`scripts/analysis-framework/lenses/government.ts`	Government action classifier	Urgency indicator
`scripts/analysis-framework/lenses/international.ts`	International scope checker	Scope level
`scripts/analysis-framework/lenses/opposition.ts`	Opposition response classifier	Political temperature
`scripts/analysis-framework/lenses/media.ts`	Media salience estimator	Public interest score
`scripts/analysis-framework/types.ts`	TypeScript type definitions	Classification schema

Automated classifications should always be reviewed for SENSITIVE and RESTRICTED levels before workflow propagation.

templates/political-classification.md — Classification template
templates/per-file-political-intelligence.md — Per-file analysis template with classification section
reference/isms-classification-adaptation.md — ISMS mapping
political-risk-methodology.md — Risk scoring (uses classification output)
political-style-guide.md — Writing standards for each sensitivity level
ai-driven-analysis-guide.md — Per-file AI analysis protocol

🤖 AI Analysis Protocol for Classification

The AI agent MUST follow this protocol when classifying political documents:

Read this guide — understand sensitivity levels, domain taxonomy, urgency matrix, AND the advanced dimensions below
Extract key fields from the document (title, type, committee, parties involved, date)
Determine sensitivity — PUBLIC (default), SENSITIVE (triggers apply), RESTRICTED (editorial review)
Assign primary domain + up to 2 secondary domains from the 15-domain DomainKey taxonomy (see §Committee→Domain Canonical Mapping below)
Assess urgency using the calendar-aware urgency matrix
Calculate Political Temperature Index — composite score from 5 temperature indicators
Assess Strategic Significance — distinguish short-term news value from long-term importance
Determine Coalition Impact Vector — which direction does this push coalition dynamics?
Score significance per the 5-dimension rubric in significance-scoring.md

Borderline Classification Guidance

When a document falls between two classification levels:

Scenario	Resolution
SENSITIVE vs. RESTRICTED	If any single trigger exceeds threshold, classify as RESTRICTED. When in doubt, err toward higher classification.
ROUTINE vs. ELEVATED urgency	Check the legislative calendar — if within 2 weeks of a major vote, use ELEVATED.
Domain ambiguity	Assign the domain with strongest evidence as primary; use secondary domains for remaining relevance. CON (Constitution) and DEF (Defence) always take precedence when applicable.
Manual vs. automated score divergence (>3 points)	Use the higher score and flag for human editorial review with a note explaining the divergence.

🌡️ Advanced Dimension 1: Political Temperature Index

The Political Temperature Index (PTI) is a composite score (0–100) measuring how politically heated an event is — beyond simple sensitivity classification:

graph LR
    PTI["🌡️ Political<br/>Temperature Index<br/>(0-100)"]
    PTI --> P1["📊 Partisan Charge<br/>(0-20)"]
    PTI --> P2["🏛️ Institutional Impact<br/>(0-20)"]
    PTI --> P3["📰 Media Amplification<br/>(0-20)"]
    PTI --> P4["👥 Public Salience<br/>(0-20)"]
    PTI --> P5["⏰ Temporal Pressure<br/>(0-20)"]

    style PTI fill:#D32F2F,color:#FFFFFF

Temperature Component	Score Range	Assessment Criteria
Partisan Charge	0–20	How divided are parties? (0=consensus, 20=deep partisan division)
Institutional Impact	0–20	Does this affect democratic institutions? (0=routine, 20=constitutional crisis)
Media Amplification	0–20	Is media likely to amplify? (0=below radar, 20=front-page scandal)
Public Salience	0–20	Does the public care? (0=technical, 20=pocketbook/safety issue)
Temporal Pressure	0–20	How urgent is action? (0=no deadline, 20=imminent crisis)

Temperature Classification

PTI Score	Temperature	Colour	Implication
0–20	❄️ Cold	🔵 Blue	Routine; standard monitoring
21–40	🌤️ Warm	🟢 Green	Active interest; regular reporting
41–60	🔥 Hot	🟡 Yellow	Politically significant; priority analysis
61–80	🔥🔥 Very Hot	🟠 Orange	Crisis-adjacent; intensive monitoring
81–100	🌋 Explosive	🔴 Red	Constitutional/political crisis; immediate response

🎯 Advanced Dimension 2: Strategic Significance Assessment

Not all politically heated events have long-term significance, and some seemingly routine events have major strategic importance. Distinguish news value (short-term) from strategic significance (long-term):

Dimension	News Value (Short-Term)	Strategic Significance (Long-Term)
Time horizon	Today's headlines	Next 6–24 months
Question	"Will this make the news?"	"Will this change the political landscape?"
Indicators	Media interest, public reaction	Institutional change, precedent setting
Example (high news, low strategic)	Minister's gaffe goes viral	"Temporary embarrassment, no policy change"
Example (low news, high strategic)	Technical SOU on pension reform	"Quietly reshapes retirement policy for 10M Swedes"

Strategic Significance Score (1–5)

Score	Level	Criteria
1	Ephemeral	No lasting impact; forgotten within a week
2	Routine	Standard political activity; minor adjustments
3	Significant	Affects a policy domain meaningfully for 6+ months
4	Major	Reshapes political dynamics; affects coalition/opposition positioning
5	Transformative	Changes Swedish governance, institutions, or democratic norms

🧭 Advanced Dimension 3: Coalition Impact Vector

For every classified event, assess its impact on coalition dynamics using a directional vector:

Vector	Description	Example
→ Stabilising	Strengthens coalition cohesion or majority	Budget passes with full coalition + SD support
← Destabilising	Weakens coalition cohesion or threatens majority	SD publicly criticises government on migration
↕ Neutral	No significant impact on coalition dynamics	Routine committee report on agriculture
↗ Opportunity	Creates an opening for coalition to strengthen position	Popular policy initiative with cross-party support
↘ Vulnerability	Exposes coalition weakness that opposition may exploit	KU investigation reveals government negligence

📡 MCP Data Sources for Classification

The riksdag-regering-mcp server provides direct access to Swedish parliamentary data for classification. Each Riksdag document type maps to a specific MCP tool and carries a default classification baseline:

Riksdag Document Type	MCP Tool	Classification Baseline	Elevation Triggers
Betänkande (committee report)	`get_betankanden`	HIGH	Fiscal policy (FiU), constitutional matters (KU)
Proposition (government bill)	`get_propositioner`	HIGH	All government bills carry legislative weight
Motion (parliamentary motion)	`get_motioner`	MEDIUM	Cross-party co-sponsorship; opposition joint motions
Interpellation	`get_interpellationer`	MEDIUM	Ministerial evasion; repeated follow-up questions
Skriftlig fråga (written question)	`get_fragor`	ROUTINE	Elevated for oral questions (muntlig fråga)
Votering (vote record)	`search_voteringar`	MEDIUM	Contested votes; coalition splits; narrow margins
Anförande (speech/debate)	`search_anforanden`	ROUTINE	Elevated for party leader statements; budget debates

Committee-Specific Baseline Elevations

The 16 standing committees (utskott) influence classification baseline:

Committee	Code	Default Elevation	Rationale
Finansutskottet	FiU	+1 level	Budget and fiscal policy
Justitieutskottet	JuU	+1 level	Criminal law and courts
Konstitutionsutskottet	KU	+1 level	Constitutional oversight (granskning)
Socialförsäkringsutskottet	SfU	Context-dependent	Migration policy sensitivity
Utrikesutskottet	UU	+1 level	Foreign policy, NATO, EU
Försvarsutskottet	FöU	+1 level	Defence and national security
Socialutskottet	SoU	Standard	Unless healthcare crisis
Utbildningsutskottet	UbU	Standard	Unless school reform controversy
Miljö- och jordbruksutskottet	MJU	Standard	Unless climate policy debate
Näringsutskottet	NäU	Context-dependent	Energy and nuclear policy sensitivity
Trafikutskottet	TU	Standard	Unless major infrastructure controversy
Skatteutskottet	SkU	+1 level	Tax policy impacts all citizens
Arbetsmarknadsutskottet	AU	Context-dependent	Labour market sensitivity
Civilutskottet	CU	Standard	Unless housing crisis
Kulturutskottet	KrU	Standard	Unless media/press freedom
EU-nämnden	EUN	+1 level	EU mandate decisions

🔄 MCP-Integrated Classification Workflow

When using riksdag-regering-mcp tools for automated classification, follow this step-by-step protocol:

Read this guide — understand sensitivity levels, domain taxonomy, urgency matrix, and all advanced dimensions
Extract key fields using MCP tools — fetch document metadata (title, dok_id, doktyp, committee/organ, parties involved, date/datum)
Determine sensitivity level — apply the decision tree: PUBLIC (default), SENSITIVE (any trigger from §2 applies), RESTRICTED (requires editorial review before publication)
Assign primary policy domain from the Swedish 16-committee taxonomy (FiU→ECO, JuU→JUS, KU→CON, FöU→DEF, UU→FOR, SfU→MIG, etc.)
Assess urgency using the parliamentary calendar — cross-reference get_calendar_events for upcoming votes and debates
Score significance per the 5-dimension rubric: Partisan Charge, Institutional Impact, Media Amplification, Public Salience, Temporal Pressure

MCP Tool Selection by Document Type

graph TD
    START["📋 Classification Task"] --> DOCTYPE{Document Type?}

    DOCTYPE -->|Committee Report| BET["get_betankanden<br/>→ Baseline: HIGH"]
    DOCTYPE -->|Government Bill| PROP["get_propositioner<br/>→ Baseline: HIGH"]
    DOCTYPE -->|Motion| MOT["get_motioner<br/>→ Baseline: MEDIUM"]
    DOCTYPE -->|Interpellation| INTER["get_interpellationer<br/>→ Baseline: MEDIUM"]
    DOCTYPE -->|Written Question| FRAG["get_fragor<br/>→ Baseline: ROUTINE"]
    DOCTYPE -->|Vote Record| VOT["search_voteringar<br/>→ Baseline: MEDIUM"]
    DOCTYPE -->|Speech/Debate| ANF["search_anforanden<br/>→ Baseline: ROUTINE"]

    BET --> ENRICH["Enrich with context:<br/>get_dokument_innehall<br/>search_voteringar<br/>search_anforanden"]
    PROP --> ENRICH
    MOT --> ENRICH
    INTER --> ENRICH
    FRAG --> ENRICH
    VOT --> ENRICH
    ANF --> ENRICH

    ENRICH --> CLASSIFY["Apply classification<br/>methodology"]

    style BET fill:#FFEBEE,stroke:#D32F2F
    style PROP fill:#FFEBEE,stroke:#D32F2F
    style MOT fill:#FFFDE7,stroke:#FFC107
    style INTER fill:#FFFDE7,stroke:#FFC107
    style FRAG fill:#E8F5E9,stroke:#4CAF50
    style VOT fill:#FFFDE7,stroke:#FFC107
    style ANF fill:#E8F5E9,stroke:#4CAF50
    style CLASSIFY fill:#E3F2FD,stroke:#2196F3

🔀 Sensitivity Level Decision Tree (MCP-Enhanced)

Use this decision tree when processing documents fetched via riksdag-regering-mcp:

graph TD
    A["📄 Incoming Riksdag Document<br/>(via riksdag-regering-mcp)"] --> B{Contains legally<br/>sensitive data?<br/><em>Personal data, SÄPO,<br/>ongoing court proceedings</em>}
    B -->|Yes| C["🔴 RESTRICTED<br/>Editorial review mandatory"]
    B -->|No| D{Politically charged?<br/><em>Coalition threat,<br/>ministerial crisis,<br/>KU granskning</em>}
    D -->|Yes| E["🟡 SENSITIVE<br/>Careful framing required"]
    D -->|No| F["🟢 PUBLIC<br/>Standard workflow"]

    C --> G["⚠️ Route to senior editor<br/>Do NOT auto-publish"]
    E --> H["📝 Apply attribution rules<br/>from political-style-guide.md"]
    F --> I["✅ Classify and publish<br/>via standard pipeline"]

    style A fill:#E3F2FD,stroke:#2196F3
    style C fill:#FFEBEE,stroke:#D32F2F,color:#B71C1C
    style E fill:#FFFDE7,stroke:#FFC107,color:#F57C00
    style F fill:#E8F5E9,stroke:#4CAF50,color:#1B5E20
    style G fill:#FFCDD2,stroke:#EF5350
    style H fill:#FFF9C4,stroke:#FFD54F
    style I fill:#C8E6C9,stroke:#81C784

⚖️ Borderline Classification Guidance (MCP Context)

When automated classification via MCP tools produces ambiguous results:

Scenario	Resolution	MCP Verification
SENSITIVE vs. RESTRICTED	Err toward RESTRICTED (higher classification). If any single trigger exceeds threshold, classify RESTRICTED.	Cross-reference `search_voteringar` for contested votes; check `get_interpellationer` for ministerial evasion patterns
ROUTINE vs. ELEVATED urgency	Check parliamentary calendar — within 2 weeks of major vote → ELEVATED	Use `get_calendar_events` to verify upcoming Riksdag schedule
Domain ambiguity	Assign strongest-evidence domain as primary; use secondary domains for remaining relevance. `constitutional` and `defence` always take precedence.	Verify committee assignment via `get_dokument` metadata (`organ` field)
Manual vs. automated divergence	Use the higher score and flag for human editorial review with divergence note	Compare MCP-extracted data against manual analysis; document discrepancy

⚠️ Classification Quality Gate

🚫 Anti-Pattern Warning: Classification output without all three of the following is REJECTED by the pipeline:

Explicit sensitivity level (PUBLIC / SENSITIVE / RESTRICTED)

Domain key from the 15-domain DomainKey taxonomy (fiscal, defence, justice, healthcare, education, environment, labour, housing, transport, trade, eu-foreign, migration, constitutional, culture, social-insurance) — see §Committee→Domain Canonical Mapping

Urgency level (ROUTINE / ELEVATED / URGENT / CRITICAL)

Incomplete classifications are returned to the originating agent for remediation. No downstream processing (risk scoring, significance assessment, publication) proceeds until all three fields are present.

🏛️ Committee→Domain Canonical Mapping (v2.2)

This table is the authoritative single source of truth for mapping Riksdag committee codes to policy domains. Both the TypeScript classification code (scripts/data-transformers/constants/committee-names.ts: COMMITTEE_TO_DOMAIN) and AI analysis agents reference this table. Any discrepancy should be resolved by updating the code to match this document.

Primary Mapping: 15 Riksdag Committees → Policy Domains

Committee Code	Committee Name (Swedish)	Committee Name (English)	Domain Key	Domain Display Name	Classification Priority
AU	Arbetsmarknadsutskottet	Committee on Labour Market Affairs	`labour`	Labour Market	Standard
CU	Civilutskottet	Committee on Civil Affairs	`housing`	Housing & Civil Law	Standard
FiU	Finansutskottet	Committee on Finance	`fiscal`	Fiscal Policy	Elevated (budget)
FöU	Försvarsutskottet	Committee on Defence	`defence`	Defence & Security	Elevated (security)
JuU	Justitieutskottet	Committee on Justice	`justice`	Justice & Law	Standard
KU	Konstitutionsutskottet	Committee on the Constitution	`constitutional`	Constitutional Affairs	Elevated (oversight)
KrU	Kulturutskottet	Committee on Cultural Affairs	`culture`	Culture & Media	Standard
MJU	Miljö- och jordbruksutskottet	Committee on Environment and Agriculture	`environment`	Environment & Agriculture	Standard
NU	Näringsutskottet	Committee on Industry and Trade	`trade`	Industry & Trade	Standard
SkU	Skatteutskottet	Committee on Taxation	`fiscal`	Fiscal Policy	Elevated (taxation)
SfU	Socialförsäkringsutskottet	Committee on Social Insurance	`social-insurance`	Social Insurance	Standard
SoU	Socialutskottet	Committee on Social Affairs	`healthcare`	Healthcare & Social Affairs	Standard
TU	Trafikutskottet	Committee on Transport	`transport`	Transport & Infrastructure	Standard
UbU	Utbildningsutskottet	Committee on Education	`education`	Education & Research	Standard
UU	Utrikesutskottet	Committee on Foreign Affairs	`eu-foreign`	EU & Foreign Affairs	Elevated (external)

Classification Priority Notes

Elevated committees (FiU, FöU, KU, SkU, UU) produce documents that default to ELEVATED urgency baseline due to their institutional significance
FiU + SkU both map to fiscal domain — the committee code distinguishes spending (FiU) from revenue (SkU) context
KU documents involving granskning (constitutional review) default to SENSITIVE classification

Usage in Classification Pipeline

flowchart LR
    DOC["📄 Riksdag Document<br/>with organ field"]
    DOC --> CHECK{"organ in<br/>COMMITTEE_TO_DOMAIN?"}
    CHECK -->|"Yes"| HIGH["✅ Domain assigned<br/>Confidence: HIGH"]
    CHECK -->|"No / missing"| FALLBACK["🔍 Keyword heuristics<br/>Confidence: LOW"]

    style DOC fill:#E3F2FD,stroke:#2196F3
    style HIGH fill:#C8E6C9,stroke:#4CAF50
    style FALLBACK fill:#FFF9C4,stroke:#FFD54F

Rule: Committee-code classification is always PRIMARY (HIGH confidence). Keyword-based domain detection is FALLBACK only (LOW confidence). When both are present, the committee-code result takes precedence.

Code Reference

// Source: scripts/data-transformers/constants/committee-names.ts
export const COMMITTEE_TO_DOMAIN = {
  AU: 'labour',
  CU: 'housing',
  FiU: 'fiscal',
  FöU: 'defence',
  JuU: 'justice',
  KU: 'constitutional',
  KrU: 'culture',
  MJU: 'environment',
  NU: 'trade',
  SkU: 'fiscal',
  SfU: 'social-insurance',
  SoU: 'healthcare',
  TU: 'transport',
  UbU: 'education',
  UU: 'eu-foreign'
} as const;

Maintenance rule: If a new committee is created or an existing committee is renamed, update BOTH this table AND the TypeScript constant in the same PR.

Document Control:

Path: /analysis/methodologies/political-classification-guide.md
ISMS Reference: CLASSIFICATION.md
Version: 2.3
Advanced Dimensions: Political Temperature Index, Strategic Significance, Coalition Impact Vector, Election 2026 Context
Key Changes v2.3: Added Election 2026 classification context (electoral sensitivity boost rules for pre-election period), 5-level confidence scale integration, enhanced urgency criteria for election-year events
Key Changes v2.2: Committee→Domain Canonical Mapping (15 committees with domain keys, classification priorities, Mermaid pipeline diagram, code reference)
MCP Integration: riksdag-regering-mcp tool mapping, committee-specific baselines
Classification: Public
Next Review: 2026-09-01