If the Convening Authority is given reason to believe that a Committee of Evidence as appointed is not energetic in its activities, or if evidence exists that it is suppressing evidence, or if the prevailing mood of the Committee appointed seems to the Convening Authority to be slack and negligent or biased without evidence in favour of or against the interested parties, or if the Committee of Evidence begins witch hunting beyond the scope of its directive from the Convening Authority, or if the Committee of Evidence in the face of clear fact seems prone to overlook actual guilt or seems to be condoning crimes of a high nature, the Convening Authority may cause the Committee Members each one to undergo examination for crimes of similar nature at the hands of a newly appointed officer, but in this case any crimes so discovered if amounting to the level of felony in Scientology shall become the subject of a Committee of Evidence as the evidence obtained by the newly appointed officer by any means may not be considered to have been obtained under the Auditor’s Code but under the heading of Justice. The Convening Authority may then convene a new Committee of Evidence to try the offending member or members of the original Committee as well as the interested parties originally under question.

A higher level Convening Authority may convene upon a lower echelon executive, who had the power to have convened a Committee of Evidence who did not in the face of clear-cut need, a Committee of Evidence. In such a case the Bill of Particulars shall allege “Negligence in Justice” and name the lower level authority as the interested party. The Committee appointed must look for any undisclosed crimes or other omissions committed by the Interested Party so named.