There are around six hundred model provisions included in this document. The purpose of the model provisions is to give policy-makers and drafters as many choices as possible as to the potential policy and regulatory elements on the subject in question, without prejudging any decision. The model provisions will, of course, need to be adapted to the legal and policy context in which they are used. In particular, obligations and powers may need to be assigned to authorities and persons other than those set out in the model provisions. The model provisions are intended solely as a source of inspiration and a checklist, without any claim to validity.
Many, if not most, of the elements suggested by the various large language models are supported by real legislative examples. However, it would have been extremely cumbersome to keep track of these references at the stage of the final document. If necessary, we can make available an interim working document in which most of the references are still visible.
The model provisions were primarily drafted by one large language model, Mistral Le Chat, with additional input from several large language models during the reference gathering and ideation phase. They have been lightly edited and annotated. Despite the edits, the model provisions may still contain errors and some provisions overlap. For instance, a particular power or obligation may appear in a specific context and in a more general chapter of the document. Where such a power or obligation has been selected in a general context, it may obviously be superfluous in the specific contexts.
Most of the provisions proposed by Mistral Le Chat include a statement of reasons. While uncommon in many jurisdictions, we have retained these explanations as they can be used to fine-tune the provisions, for example, by turning the explanations into a limiting condition.
The model provisions do not constitute a single, integrated, and internally consistent document. In order not to prejudge decisions, we have deliberately left some variations. For example, it is a matter of custom whether “person” or “individual” is preferred.
Mistral Le Chat was sometimes too prescriptive in suggesting ” must ” where ” may ” would be more appropriate, at least in many jurisdictions. We have corrected this in many cases, but probably not all.
In order to use the model provisions, four steps are recommended:
- Select those that are deemed appropriate;
- Adapt them;
- Merge and rearrange them;
- Complement them, namely with certain provisions of the Cross-sectoral Standard Provisions.
For questions about this version of the model provisions or if you wish to request or contribute to further sets of model provisions, please contact us.