docs: remove stale independent-review blocker from policy adoption guidance

[Paulo Lacerda (placerda)]

Purpose

Scoped follow-up to #145. Corrects a stale statement in docs/python-development.md that incorrectly claimed an "independent human review" step (issue #695) remains an outstanding requirement for exception decisions.

What changed

• Replaced the stale sentence with language clarifying that recorded exception decisions are governed by their technical evidence (exact fingerprints, same-source bound tests, unexpired stage validation) — not by a separate independent human review step.
• No other content in the surrounding paragraphs was changed.
• Integrity/fingerprint/expiry/check-validation language is preserved unchanged.

What did NOT change

• No ruleset, tag, or release changes.
• No production/application code changes.
• No new reviewer bureaucracy introduced; this is a pure correction removing an inaccurate blocker statement per explicit instruction.

Validation

• Ran the existing policy mutation-negative test suite against this branch (based on current develop tip e93b3d3e):

  python -m unittest discover -s tests -p "test_quality_policy.py" -v
  

  Result: 56 tests run — OK (0 failures, 0 errors), covering malformed/unknown-schema records, expired/unbound exception evidence, alias/member rebinding invalidation, and protected-checker/baseline tamper rejection.
• This confirms the previously-passing negative mutation coverage is unaffected by this docs-only change.

Scope note

Independent human exception-review is not a technical gate in this repository; the governing controls are the recorded technical evidence (fingerprints, binding, expiry, protected-checker validation) exercised by the test suite above.