The author says -- twice -- that participation in IAF CertSearch is "mandatory for accredited certification bodies." But he offers no proof of this.
In order to make this "mandatory," one of two things would need to happen. First, the ISO CASCO committee would have to make participation in CertSearch a mandatory requirement under ISO 17011 and/or ISO 17021-1. This will not happen, since ISO cannot make participation in a third-party program a requirement in any of its standards.
That only leaves a contractual change to the IAF MRA. But that has NOT happened.
The IAF has floated a "model" whereby they will require its AB members to push down a requirement to participate in CertSearch to their CBs. However, the IAF lacks the legal authority to do so, and cannot inject itself into the contractual arrangements between third parties, so this could be challenged in court. Furthermore, the IAF has refused to enforce the "MD" and "ML" series documents that exist now, so there is no precedent for them to suddenly begin doing so. Finally, this doesn't address the fact that the ABs and CBs can simply refuse, forcing the IAF to either withdraw its CertSearch requirement or close up shop entirely. Since the CBs (especially BSI) have been the biggest critics against the idea of CertSearch, their refusal is a near guarantee.
Furthermore, the official IAF FAQ page on the Certsearch program indicates that this "mandatory" requirement can only be flowed down via an update to IAF ML4. (See https://iaf.nu/en/faq/ and scroll down to Q41.) IAF ML4 was updated in June of 2023, and no language at all was added regarding Certsearch.
So I invite Mr. Ramely to explain where he is getting this information from, and provide the source. Failing that, I urge the editors to correct the article and the tagline, as it appears to contain wholly false information.
The author says -- twice -- that participation in IAF CertSearch is "mandatory for accredited certification bodies." But he offers no proof of this.
In order to make this "mandatory," one of two things would need to happen. First, the ISO CASCO committee would have to make participation in CertSearch a mandatory requirement under ISO 17011 and/or ISO 17021-1. This will not happen, since ISO cannot make participation in a third-party program a requirement in any of its standards.
That only leaves a contractual change to the IAF MRA. But that has NOT happened.
The IAF has floated a "model" whereby they will require its AB members to push down a requirement to participate in CertSearch to their CBs. However, the IAF lacks the legal authority to do so, and cannot inject itself into the contractual arrangements between third parties, so this could be challenged in court. Furthermore, the IAF has refused to enforce the "MD" and "ML" series documents that exist now, so there is no precedent for them to suddenly begin doing so. Finally, this doesn't address the fact that the ABs and CBs can simply refuse, forcing the IAF to either withdraw its CertSearch requirement or close up shop entirely. Since the CBs (especially BSI) have been the biggest critics against the idea of CertSearch, their refusal is a near guarantee.
Furthermore, the official IAF FAQ page on the Certsearch program indicates that this "mandatory" requirement can only be flowed down via an update to IAF ML4. (See https://iaf.nu/en/faq/ and scroll down to Q41.) IAF ML4 was updated in June of 2023, and no language at all was added regarding Certsearch.
So I invite Mr. Ramely to explain where he is getting this information from, and provide the source. Failing that, I urge the editors to correct the article and the tagline, as it appears to contain wholly false information.