Well, that's illegal, since the law directs specific whole changes in each case. You can't replace a provision in its entirety with two different new versions and keep them in superposition or whatever. The law has to be one specific written thing.
But you have a good point about the folks in charge agreeing on an outcome here. That's really all that matters right now, since it means there's no legal risk to the Scribe or SoS for writing up a third new version of Lexh.E.4. Legal risk would require someone charging them with a crime. The Government's not going to do that, so they don't need to worry. I guess hypothetically a private citizen could do a Roman prosecution, but the Government could even appeal a potential conviction unopposed. And there's no future prospect of a government that might reverse that decision, either. So everyone involved is pretty much safe as houses.
Fair enough and never mind :)
But you have a good point about the folks in charge agreeing on an outcome here. That's really all that matters right now, since it means there's no legal risk to the Scribe or SoS for writing up a third new version of Lexh.E.4. Legal risk would require someone charging them with a crime. The Government's not going to do that, so they don't need to worry. I guess hypothetically a private citizen could do a Roman prosecution, but the Government could even appeal a potential conviction unopposed. And there's no future prospect of a government that might reverse that decision, either. So everyone involved is pretty much safe as houses.
Fair enough and never mind :)