Legal work and accountability

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

You are translating for a civil society organisation. Translate the text below from [SOURCE LANGUAGE] into [TARGET LANGUAGE].

Rules:
1. Translate the meaning, not word by word. Keep the register formal and plain.
2. Add nothing, remove nothing, soften nothing. If the source is vague, stay vague.
3. Copy every name, number, date and quotation exactly as it appears in the source. Keep each number in the digit form the source uses, and say so where the source mixes digits: ١٢٣ alongside 123.
4. The first time a legal or technical term appears, put the original word in brackets after your translation.
5. Mark anything you are unsure about with [CHECK] inside the translation.

Give me, in this order:
A. The translation.
B. A table with two columns: the source term, and the wording you chose for it.
C. Every [CHECK] you marked, with one line each saying why.

If you are reading on a phone, replace the table with one block per row: a heading line, then one short labelled line per column.

Text to translate:
[PASTE THE TEXT]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

Read the document below and write a brief for a colleague who has not read it.

Rules:
1. Use only what is in the document. Add nothing from your own knowledge. If you are not sure whether something is in it, leave it out.
2. Every point must name the page, article or section it comes from.
3. Quote the exact wording for anything that could be disputed.
4. Copy every number and date in the digit form the document uses, and flag it where the document mixes digits: ١٢٣ alongside 123.
5. Do not soften and do not dramatise.

Give me, in this order:
A. What this document is, in one sentence: who wrote it, when, and what it decides or reports.
B. The ten most important points, one line each, each with its page or section. Carry every number, date and deadline inside the point it belongs to, each with its own page.
C. What the document does NOT say that a reader would expect it to.
D. Three questions this document leaves open.

Document:
[PASTE THE DOCUMENT]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

Below are notes from several sources, with names and identifying details already removed. Build a timeline from them.

Rules:
1. Use only what the notes say. Infer nothing. Never calculate or guess a date.
2. One row per event. If two notes describe the same event, merge them into one row and list both sources.
3. If an event has no date, it goes in the undated list, not in the table.
4. Mark each row STATED if the note gives the date, or UNCLEAR if the note is ambiguous about it.
5. Copy each date in the form the note wrote it. Where the notes mix digits, ١٢٣ alongside 123, or write one date two ways, keep both and mark the row UNCLEAR.
6. Name people only by the label the notes use. Never replace a label with a real name.

Give me, in this order:
A. A table with these columns: date, what happened, where, who the note names, source note, STATED or UNCLEAR.
B. Undated events, as a list, each with its source note.
C. Contradictions between the notes, quoted on both sides.
D. What a reader would need next to close each contradiction.

If you are reading on a phone, replace the table with one block per row: a heading line, then one short labelled line per column.

Notes:
[PASTE THE REDACTED NOTES]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

Below are two versions of the same law, regulation or bill. Version 1 is the older one. Version 2 is the newer one.

Rules:
1. Compare them article by article. Quote the exact wording on both sides.
2. Report only what changed. Do not summarise what stayed the same.
3. Say what each change does in practice, in one plain sentence. No political comment.
4. If an article was renumbered but its wording is the same, write RENUMBERED. Do not report it as removed.
5. Article numbers may arrive in mixed digits: ١٢٣ alongside 123. Treat ١٢ and 12 as the same article.
6. If a change is ambiguous, say so and give both readings. If neither version settles a point, write "the document does not say" instead of filling the gap.

Give me, in this order:
A. A table: article, wording in version 1, wording in version 2, what it changes in practice, who it affects.
B. Articles removed or added. One line each, marked REMOVED or ADDED, with the article number and its subject.
C. The three changes that most affect civil society organisations, and why.
D. Anything you could not compare because the numbering differs.

If you are reading on a phone, replace the table with one block per row: a heading line, then one short labelled line per column.

Version 1:
[PASTE THE OLDER VERSION]

Version 2:
[PASTE THE NEWER VERSION]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

I am about to work on a document in an AI tool. Before I do, help me decide what must come out of it. I am not going to paste the document. I will name its type.

Rules:
1. Do not ask me to paste the document, and do not ask me for a sample of it.
2. Do not ask where the document came from or who else holds a copy. Neither one is needed for a redaction list.
3. Write for the type I picked. Do not write a general list that would fit any document.
4. Name what must be removed in the words that really appear on a page of this type, so I can find them by eye.

The type of document, pick one: [AN INTAKE FORM / A WITNESS STATEMENT / A PAYROLL SHEET / A CASE LOG / A PARTNER REPORT / A MEETING RECORD]
Who appears in it: [BY ROLE OR CATEGORY ONLY, NEVER BY NAME]
What I want the AI tool to do with it: [DESCRIBE THE TASK IN ONE SENTENCE]

Give me, in this order:
A. What must be removed before a document of this type goes into any tool that is not on our own machine.
B. The details people leave in that still identify someone once they are combined: a village name plus an age, a rare job title, the date of an event only a few people attended. List the ones that apply to this document type.
C. What may stay because the task needs it, then the order of work, so a partly redacted copy is never saved over the original.
D. How to check the redaction worked, including what to search for, such as mixed digits: ١٢٣ alongside 123, and then whether this task can be done at all with the material redacted, or whether it needs a route where nothing leaves our own machine.

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

You have one question and one long document. Find the clause that answers it.

Rules:
1. Use only the document below. Never answer from general knowledge about how such documents usually read.
2. Quote, never paraphrase. Copy the clause word for word, with its number or heading as printed, including mixed digits: ١٢٣ alongside 123.
3. If the document does not answer the question, write "The document does not answer this" and then give the nearest related clause, quoted.
4. Search the whole document for anything that changes the answer: a definition, an exception, an annex, a later clause that overrides an earlier one.
5. Mark anything you are unsure about with [CHECK] and say why in one line.

Give me, in this order:
A. The clause that answers my question, quoted in full, with its number.
B. What it means in practice, in one plain sentence.
C. Anything elsewhere in the document that limits it, extends it or contradicts it, each quoted with its number.
D. Every [CHECK] you marked, one line each.

My question:
[WRITE YOUR QUESTION IN ONE SENTENCE]

Document:
[PASTE THE DOCUMENT]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

Below is the table of contents of one issue of an official gazette. I have the titles only, not the full texts. Sort them for me.

Rules:
1. Work only from the titles I give you. Do not describe content you have not been given, and do not fill it in from what such items usually contain.
2. Where the title alone does not say what an item changes, write "The title alone is not enough" in that cell and stop there.
3. Copy each item's number, date and title exactly as printed, including mixed digits: ١٢٣ alongside 123.
4. Give every item one verdict: "Read in full", "Watch" or "Ignore", with a reason of one line.
5. Add nothing about who published it, why, or what it means politically.

Give me, in this order:
A. A table with these columns: item as printed, what it appears to change, who it appears to affect, verdict, reason.
B. The items where the title alone is not enough, listed again, each with the one question that would settle it.
C. If there is time for only three, the order to open them in.

If you are reading on a phone, replace the table with one block per row: a heading line, then one short labelled line per column.

Table of contents:
[PASTE THE LIST OF ITEMS]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

Below is a published draft law, and a list of the articles I want to comment on with my own published evidence for each. Write the comment I will submit.

Rules:
1. Comment only on the articles I list. Add no other article, however weak it looks.
2. Use only the evidence I give you. Never invent a case, a figure, a date or a source, and never add an example of your own.
3. Where my evidence does not carry the point, write "Evidence missing" and the one line I would have to supply.
4. Quote the article's current wording exactly, then give the proposed wording in full, so the two can be read side by side.
5. Plain and formal. Propose wording. Do not argue about motive and do not accuse.

Give me, for each article I list, in this order:
A. The article number, its current wording quoted, and the exact wording proposed instead.
B. The reason, in one sentence, naming which of my evidence lines it rests on.
C. The effect on the people this article reaches, using only what my evidence says. Where my evidence does not say, write it as a question for me to answer before I submit.

Then once at the end:
D. Every "Evidence missing" line, gathered in one list.

Keep the whole comment under one page.

Draft law:
[PASTE THE ARTICLES OF THE DRAFT LAW]

Articles I am commenting on, and my evidence for each:
[LIST EACH ARTICLE NUMBER AND ONE LINE OF YOUR OWN PUBLISHED EVIDENCE]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

I am about to record a testimony. Write the words I will say out loud to ask for consent, in plain language anyone can follow, including someone who cannot read. The recording will be [AUDIO OR VIDEO]. Ask me nothing about the person: this is a script I speak, not a record about anybody.

Rules:
1. Promise nothing I have not told you I can deliver. Where the script needs a fact only I know, leave a blank in square brackets with a short label, for example [WHERE THE FILE IS KEPT]. Never fill such a blank with a guess.
2. Never say the recording is safe, secure, anonymous, or impossible to trace. Say what happens to it, in plain words.
3. Short sentences. One idea per sentence. No legal wording and no form language.
4. Write it to be spoken, so I can read it aloud without stumbling.
5. Say clearly that the person may refuse, may stop at any moment, may answer some questions and not others, and that nothing they receive from us depends on their answer.

Give me, in this order:
A. The spoken script, covering in this order: what is being recorded and how long it will take, where the file is kept and for how long, who can listen to it, what will be published and where, what will be left out, how the person withdraws, who they contact to withdraw, and the last date on which withdrawal is still possible.
B. Three questions to ask afterwards to confirm the person understood, written so that yes or no is not an answer.
C. The one line to record at the start of the file to say consent was given, and the fields that line must contain.
D. Every square bracket blank you left, gathered in one list, so I can fill them in before I start.

Keep the whole page under 400 words.