WHEREAS all legitimate sides to an argument should be represented and have the fullest chance to work together to approach justice,
THEREFORE the following provision shall be added to Title G of el Lexhatx:
12.1. A member of the bar shall not initiate ex parte communications, or other communications made to a judge outside the presence of the parties or their lawyers, concerning a pending or impending matter, except as follows:
12.1.1. When circumstances require it, ex parte communication for scheduling, administrative, expert testimony, or emergency purposes, which does not address substantive matters, is permitted, provided:
12.1.1.1. the member of the bar reasonably believes that no party will gain a procedural, substantive, or tactical advantage as a result of the ex parte communication; and
12.1.1.2. the member of the bar makes provision promptly to notify all other parties of the substance of the ex parte communication, and gives the parties an opportunity to respond.
12.2. If a member of the bar inadvertently initiates or receives an unauthorized ex parte communication bearing upon the substance of a matter, the member of the bar shall make provision promptly to notify all the parties of the substance of the communication and provide the parties with an opportunity to respond.
12.3. A member of the bar shall make reasonable efforts, including providing appropriate supervision, to ensure that these provisions against ex parte communications are not violated by others subject to the member of the bar's direction or control.
FURTHERMORE, a new provision shall be added to Title D of el Lexhatx:
2.5.1.5. The Ministry of Justice shall vigilantly supervise its officers and appointees to ensure that they do not engage in ex parte communication, in keeping with the provisions of Lex.G.12.
2.5.1.6. The Ministry of Justice shall vigilantly supervise its officers and appointees to ensure that there are no conflicts of interest between them and their work, either in fact or in appearance. In such an instance as a conflict of interest exists and no alternative officer of the Ministry is capable of making the decision in the stead of the conflicted officer, then an independent counsel, appointed by the Avocat-Xheneral, shall be responsible for making such decisions or engaging in such actions as present a conflict.
2.5.1.7. The Ministry of Justice shall not engage in post-hoc review of prior convictions before a magistrate unless the interests of justice are represented in the form of an independent counsel, appointed by the Avocat-Xheneral, who shall be responsible for vigorously contesting this review.
Ureu q'estadra så,
Baron Alexandreu Davinescu (MC-RUMP)