Your question:

"Why don’t you ban all the cards that have the “partner” keyword, or take similar decisions, such as restricting the cards in the command zone to one?"

Our answer:

First, we try not to modify rules that could contradict those that come from the comprehensive Wizards Of The Coast rules. Life totals, commander damage, etc. can differ. That’s our limit, so far. Using the regular way would mean adding 79 cards today to the B&R, which is not really appropriate either. Our approach is the same: focus on results and imbalance, then act on specific cards when possible. 

We changed the rules in February 2022 regarding multiple commander in command zones.

We discussed the easinesses and difficulties of individual, grouped, and structural game rules in our 2023 panel.

Your question:

"Hello, what is the point of view of the Committee on manabases of 5-color decks? These kinds of deck (Niv Mizzet, The First Sliver,...) seem to be way more stable than some bicolor decks. Is a ban of a land cycle (ABUR dual lands, fetchlands,...) conceivable if this kind of decks performs too well?"

Our answer:

We agree on your point. The singleton nature of the format makes 4-5 color decks more stable than two-color ones. This is structural. However, we do not plan to adjust this point as it would require massive changes for a minor gain. Also, recent prints (2018-now) tend to slowly tackle and fix this problem, as you can see in our 2023 Panel.

Your question:

"[Translated from French] Hello, I have a problem with the phasing rule. A card like Oubliette totally blocks commanders and doesn't allow interacting like we could do with Claustrophobia or Stasis Snare, where rules allow putting commanders back into command zones. There aren't enchantment removal effects in all colors and answers are very limited, which unfortunately often changes the course of games. Thanks."

Our answer:

Cards that make commanders unavailable (like Oubliette/Nevermore/Drannith Magistrate) represent an interesting part of the metagame as they favour less linear and more subtle deckbuilding. Only very oppressive cards like Karakas should be banned.

Your question:

"How will Historic Horizon cards, specifically ones that utilize the Seek, Conjure, and Perpetually mechanics, be handled?"

Our answer:

Historic Horizons cards are not physical cards but only digital ones. So they will not be legal for non-MTGA events like DC tournaments. We only support our game based on Magic The Gathering™ cards. The definition of such items can be found in the Tournament Rules: https://wpn.wizards.com/en/rules-documents. 

Your question:

"Hi - our local game store runs Duel Commander as an FNM format and allows free mulligans as it is a "casual" format for these events. I, along with some others, have argued that they should follow the London Mulligan rule, as stated in your Mulligan Rules section. Could you please clarify whether we should use London Mulligans, or whether it would be up to the tournament organizer? "

Our answer:

Commander relies on a social contract when it comes to rules. Duel Commander does not. That being said, anyone not following official Duel Commander rules will be playing another type of game, that won't be Duel Commander. Though mulligans are not construction rules, they deviate less than some other rules. Yet, they still represent a rules deviation. We do not sanction tournaments or people ourselves. 

In this case, we suggest you turn to the judges and other players to reset the tournament play back to official rules, pointing our official documents as you already did (which is the best stance to adopt).

Currently, Duel Commander uses a mulligan system equal to the one Magic The Gathering uses for homogeneity concerns.