1. Elders should act promptly when they receive a report of serious wrongdoing so as to safeguard the congregation and provide assistance to the wrongdoer. (Jude 4) Neglecting to care for such matters can hinder the flow of Jehovah’s holy spirit to the congregation. Elders must first assess whether the alleged wrongdoing, if established, is serious enough to require a judicial committee.

2. Listed below are offenses that may require review by a judicial committee. Of course, this list is not comprehensive. There may be other matters that would also merit the attention of a judicial committee. The elders must use good judgment and reasonableness when evaluating the seriousness of the alleged wrongdoing. They should consider the extent and nature of the misconduct, intent and motive, frequency or practice, and so forth. If there is a question about whether certain wrongdoing merits judicial action, the body of elders may write to the branch office requesting further direction concerning the case.

3. Manslaughter: Aside from deliberate murder, bloodguilt may be incurred if a person causes loss of life through carelessness or because of violating a traffic law or other safety law of Caesar. The elders should investigate and if warranted appoint a judicial committee to hear the matter. The committee should base its decision on clearly established facts, not simply on a decision that may have been made by secular authorities.​—Deut. 22:8; w06 9/15 p. 30.

4. Attempted suicide may be the result of deep despair or major depression. Deal carefully and compassionately with such a person. In most cases a judicial hearing is not required.​—Ps. 88:3, 17, 18; Prov. 15:13; Eccl. 7:7; w90 3/1 pp. 5-9; 3/15 pp. 26-30; g90 9/8 pp. 22-23; w83 8/1 pp. 3-11.

5. Por·neiʹa: (Lev. 20:10, 13, 15, 16; Rom. 1:24, 26, 27, 32; 1 Cor. 6:9, 10) Por·neiʹa involves immoral use of the genitals, whether in a natural or in a perverted way, with lewd intent. There must have been another party to the immorality​—a human of either sex or a beast. Willing participation incurs guilt and requires judicial action. It is not a casual touching of the sex organs but involves the manipulation of the genitals. It includes oral sex, anal sex, and manipulation of the genitals between individuals not married to each other. (lv p. 99; w06 7/15 pp. 29-30; w04 2/15 p. 13; w00 11/1 p. 8 par. 6; w83 6/1 pp. 23-26) Por·neiʹa does not require skin-to-skin contact, copulation (as in penetration), or sexual climax.​—See March 6, 2012, letter to all bodies of elders for further comments on the definition of porneia.

6. Self-abuse, or masturbation of oneself, is not por·neiʹa.

7. One who was raped would not be guilty of por·neiʹa. Discernment is needed in considering claims of rape, taking into consideration such factors as the mental disposition of the person, the circumstances that led up to the incident, and any delay in reporting.​—w03 2/1 pp. 30-31; it-1 pp. 862-864; w83 3/15 p. 30 ftn.

8. In all cases involving the possibility of por·neiʹa, it is the responsibility of the judicial committee to use the Scriptures to weigh carefully the facts in each case. This responsibility is especially serious when it involves the Scriptural freedom to remarry. (Mal. 2:16a) In situations in which the elders are uncertain or divided on their conclusions, it is best to write the branch office.

9. Brazen conduct, loose conduct: (Gal. 5:19) The Greek word translated “brazen conduct,” or “loose conduct,” is a·selʹgei·a. Strong’s Greek Dictionary uses very forceful terms to define it: “licentiousness; filth[iness], lasciviousness, wantonness.” The New Thayer’s Greek English Lexicon adds to the list “unbridled lust, . . . outrageousness, shamelessness, insolence.” Another lexicon defines a·selʹgei·a as conduct that “violates all bounds of what is socially acceptable.” Rather than relating to bad conduct of a somewhat petty or minor nature, “brazen conduct” describes acts that reflect an attitude that betrays disrespect, disregard, or even contempt for divine standards, laws, and authority. Therefore, two elements are involved in brazen conduct: (1) The conduct itself is a serious violation of Jehovah’s laws, and (2) the attitude of the wrongdoer toward God’s laws is disrespectful, insolent.​—w06 7/15 p. 30; w83 3/15 p. 31; w73 pp. 574-576.

10. Though this is not an exhaustive list, brazen conduct may be involved in the following if the wrongdoer has an insolent, contemptuous attitude made evident by a practice of these things:

• Willful, continued, unnecessary association with disfellowshipped nonrelatives despite repeated counsel.​—Matt. 18:17b; 1 Cor. 5:11, 13; 2 John 10, 11; w81 9/15 pp. 25-26.

• Child sexual abuse: This would include fondling of breasts, an explicitly immoral proposal, showing pornography to a child, voyeurism, indecent exposure, and so forth.​—See August 1, 2016, letter to all bodies of elders.

• Continuing to date or pursue a romantic relationship with a person though not legally or Scripturally free to marry, despite repeated counsel and generally after a warning talk to the congregation.​—Gal. 5:19; 2 Thess. 3:6, 14, 15.

11. Evidence (testified to by at least two witnesses) that the accused stayed all night in the same house with a person of the opposite sex (or in the same house with a known homosexual) under improper circumstances.​—If questions are raised regarding Scriptural freedom to remarry, see 12:12.

• Elders should use good judgment in assessing the situation before forming a judicial committee. Were the two persons alone together all night? Is there evidence of a romantic relationship? Are there understandable reasons, such as an unexpected emergency, that caused the situation?

• If there are no extenuating circumstances, a judicial committee would be formed on the basis of strong circumstantial evidence of por·neiʹa.

• Depending upon the attitude of the accused, there might even be evidence of brazen conduct.

• A married brother spends an inordinate amount of time with his female secretary after work hours but insists there is no romantic interest. His concerned wife informs the elders, who give him strong counsel. Later, when he claims to be leaving overnight for a “business trip,” his suspicious wife and a relative follow him to the secretary’s home. They observe the secretary invite him inside at 10 p.m. and continue watching all night until he leaves the home at 7 a.m. When the elders speak to him, he admits that he spent the night alone with his secretary, but he denies that he committed adultery. In such a case, the elders have a basis to take judicial action because there is strong circumstantial evidence of por·neiʹa and there may be elements of brazen conduct. The innocent mate’s conscience may allow her to choose to divorce him and remarry; the elders would not take action against her for making this decision.

• An elderly Christian living alone has a member of the opposite sex move into the home to help care for him. There is no evidence of a romantic attachment or reason to suspect sexual immorality.

• After attending a social gathering at a single sister’s home, a brother walks to a train station to catch the train home. After waiting for some time, the brother learns that the last train for the day has already left the station. He walks back to the sister’s home, but by the time he arrives, everyone has left and it is quite late. The sister allows him to sleep in the living room while she sleeps in her bedroom.

• A single brother visits a married couple for several days. One night after everyone goes to bed, the husband is called to an emergency at his place of work and does not return until morning. The wife and the single brother are alone in the home all night sleeping in separate bedrooms.

12. The elders cannot apply one rule to every case; each situation has unique circumstances. After two elders have thoroughly investigated, the body of elders should use good judgment in determining whether serious wrongdoing has occurred. If elders are unsure how to proceed, they should consult with the branch office.

13. Gross uncleanness, uncleanness with greediness: (2 Cor. 12:21; Gal. 5:19; Eph. 4:19) Galatians 5:19-21 lists many vices that are not classed as por·neiʹa but that could lead to one’s being disqualified from God’s Kingdom. Among them are uncleanness (Greek, a·ka·thar·siʹa). When one practices uncleanness to a gross, or serious, degree, it can be grounds for disfellowshipping from the Christian congregation. Elders should use good judgment in discerning whether the conduct is minor uncleanness that can be handled by counsel or is gross uncleanness that requires the formation of a judicial committee.​—w06 7/15 pp. 29-31; w83 3/15 p. 31.

14. Though this is not an exhaustive list, gross uncleanness may be involved in the following:

• Passion-arousing heavy petting or caressing of breasts on numerous occasions between individuals not married to each other. If such conduct occurred on a few isolated occasions, especially between two persons involved in a courtship with the intent to marry, counsel from two elders may suffice to handle such minor uncleanness. The elders should inform the coordinator of the situation. However, if the conduct occurred on numerous occasions and the actions escalated in gravity and frequency, it may constitute gross uncleanness with greediness, requiring judicial action. Their wrongdoing may constitute brazen conduct if they give evidence of a disrespectful, insolent attitude toward God’s laws. For example, the individuals may have no honorable intentions of pursuing marriage.

• A practice of engaging in immoral conversations by telephone, in Internet chat rooms, or through similar electronic means can involve obscene speech or gross uncleanness, either of which can be a basis for judicial action. (g00 1/22 pp. 20-21; km 11/99 p. 4) If such conduct occurred on a few isolated occasions, judicial action may not be necessary. Counsel from two elders is sufficient to handle such minor uncleanness. The elders should inform the coordinator of the situation. However, such conduct may escalate in gravity and by frequent repetition become gross uncleanness with greediness requiring judicial action, especially if the individual had been previously counseled.

• An entrenched practice of viewing, perhaps over a considerable period of time, abhorrent forms of pornography that is sexually degrading. Such pornography may include homosexuality (sex between those of the same gender), group sex, bestiality, sadistic torture, bondage, gang rape, the brutalizing of women, or child pornography. Brazen conduct would be involved if the offender was promoting such material, such as by inviting others to view it, thus giving evidence of a brazen attitude.​—w12 3/15 pp. 30-31; w06 7/15 p. 31. This bullet point reflects updates provided in the April 10, 2012, letter to all bodies of elders regarding pornography. See that letter for additional information.

• Misuse of tobacco: Elders should use good judgment in weighing the circumstances and extent of the wrongdoing so as to determine whether a judicial committee should be formed. For example, an elder or two may handle matters by means of counsel if a Christian smoked a few cigarettes in private. The coordinator of the body of elders should be informed. However, a judicial committee is required for a practice of using tobacco. (Mark 15:23; 2 Cor. 7:1; w06 7/15 pp. 30-31) When questions arise, consult with the branch office.

• Extreme physical uncleanness: (Deut. 23:12-14; 2 Cor. 7:1) Every effort should be made to help the offender see the need to keep his body and place of residence physically clean. Before disfellowshipping would be considered, elders would need to be certain that the uncleanness is pronounced and offensive, bringing much reproach upon Jehovah’s good name and his people in the community. Appropriate counsel should be given. If this is not heeded, then marking may be necessary. (2 Thess. 3:14) If there is blatant, willful disregard of the counsel given and extremely offensive unclean conditions continue, disfellowshipping action may be necessary.

15. Misuse of addictive drugs: (2 Cor. 7:1; Rev. 21:8, Kingdom Interlinear; 22:15, Int.) Please note: the use of addictive drugs under medical supervision, such as for pain management, would not necessarily require judicial review. When questions arise, consult with the branch office.

16. Apostasy: Apostasy is a standing away from true worship, a falling away, defection, rebellion, abandonment. It includes the following:

• Celebrating false religious holidays: (Ex. 32:4-6; Jer. 7:16-19) Not all holidays directly involve false religion and require judicial action.

• Participation in interfaith activities: (2 Cor. 6:14, 15, 17, 18) Apostate acts include bowing before altars and images and sharing in false religious songs and prayers.​—Rev. 18:2, 4.

• Deliberately spreading teachings contrary to Bible truth as taught by Jehovah’s Witnesses: (Acts 21:21, ftn.; 2 John 7, 9, 10) Any with sincere doubts should be helped. Firm, loving counsel should be given. (2 Tim. 2:16-19, 23-26; Jude 22, 23) If one obstinately is speaking about or deliberately spreading false teachings, this may be or may lead to apostasy. If there is no response after a first and a second admonition, a judicial committee should be formed.​—Titus 3:10, 11; w89 10/1 p. 19; w86 4/1 pp. 30-31; w86 3/15 p. 15.

• Causing divisions and promoting sects: This would be deliberate action disrupting the unity of the congregation or undermining the confidence of the brothers in Jehovah’s arrangement. It may involve or lead to apostasy.​—Rom. 16:17, 18; Titus 3:10, 11; it-2 p. 886.

• Continuing in employment that makes one an accomplice to or a promoter of false worship would subject one to disfellowshipping after being allowed a reasonable amount of time, perhaps up to six months, to make the needed adjustments.​—w99 4/15 pp. 28-30; km 9/76 pp. 3-6.

• The practice of spiritism.​—Deut. 18:9-13; 1 Cor. 10:21, 22; Gal. 5:20.

• Idolatry: (1 Cor. 6:9, 10; 10:14) Idolatry includes the use of images, including pictures, in false religious worship.

17. Drunkenness: (1 Cor. 5:11; 6:9, 10; it-1 p. 656) A judicial committee is required when there is a practice of drunkenness or a single incident of drunkenness that brings notoriety. (w83 5/1 p. 8) A Scriptural description of drunkenness can be found in the following references: Job 12:25; Psalm 107:27; Proverbs 20:1; 23:29-35; Isaiah 24:20.

18. If an individual confesses to an elder that on one occasion he overindulged in alcohol to the point of drunkenness in the privacy of his own home and there was no notoriety, it may suffice for the elder to give strong counsel. In any case, the elder should inform the coordinator of the matter.

19. Gluttony: (Prov. 23:20, 21; w04 11/1 pp. 30-31) A glutton routinely shows a lack of restraint, even gorging himself on food to the point of feeling very uncomfortable or becoming sick. Gluttony is determined, not by someone’s size, but by his attitude toward food.

20. Stealing, thievery: (1 Cor. 6:9, 10; Eph. 4:28; w86 11/15 p. 14) Though all stealing is wrong, the body of elders should use discernment in weighing the circumstances and the extent of the involvement in wrongdoing to determine whether it is a judicial matter.

21. Deliberate, malicious lying; bearing false witness: (Prov. 6:16, 19; Col. 3:9; Rev. 22:15; it-2 pp. 244-245) Though all lying is bad, judicial action is taken only if there has been a practice of deliberate, malicious lying. “Malicious” means deliberately harmful, harboring ill will or enmity. Lying that justifies judicial action involves more than just exaggerations or petty, misleading statements of relatively minor consequence or lying because of momentary pressure or fear of man.​—Matt. 26:69-75.

22. Generally, elders should not consider administering discipline if a Christian charges another Christian with making false statements in a court dispute. For example, this may involve divorce, child custody and support, and so forth. The Christian making the charge can express his concerns to the court that has the responsibility to determine what is truthful when rendering a judgment.

23. Fraud, slander: (Lev. 19:16; Matt. 18:15-17; it-1 pp. 870, 989-991; od pp. 147-150; w97 3/15 pp. 17-22) Fraud is defined as “the intentional use of deception, trickery, or perversion of truth for the purpose of inducing another to part with some valuable thing belonging to him or to give up a legal right.” (w97 3/15 p. 21) Slander is defined as a false report meant to do harm to the good name and reputation of another. Such talk is generally malicious. Slander is not identical to negative gossip. Negative gossip may be true; slander is always false. Negative gossip requires counsel but not judicial action. (w89 10/15 p. 10; it-1 p. 990 par. 2) The congregation would not consider forming a judicial committee unless the offended Christian had taken steps one and two of Matthew 18:15, 16 and had initiated step three of Matthew 18:17.​—od pp. 147-149.

24. If asked, elders could participate in step two, but they do not represent the body of elders. If the matter proceeds to step three, any elders who were witnesses in step two could serve only as witnesses in step three. They would not be used to serve on the judicial committee in step three.

25. It is not the place of elders to become arbitrators of financial agreements. They are not debt collectors. Nor should they be involved in formulating contracts or written agreements, not even signing as witnesses to such. The same holds true should the matter reach step three.

26. The body of elders may first need to investigate before appointing a judicial committee. If so, the brothers involved in step two would not be used to investigate; they would be interviewed as witnesses.

27. It is not considered slander to make an accusation to the police, the court, the elders, or others who have authority to look into matters and render a judgment. (it-1 p. 990) This is true even if the accusation is not proved.​—w97 8/15 p. 28 par. 1.

28. Reviling: (1 Cor. 6:10; it-2 pp. 801-802) Reviling involves “subjecting a person to insulting speech, heaping abuse upon him.” (it-2 p. 801) The body of elders should weigh the circumstances and extent of wrongdoing so as to determine whether a judicial committee should be formed. Elders should not be quick to take judicial action unless the reviling is extreme, disrupts the peace of the congregation, and persists despite repeated counsel.

29. Obscene speech: (Eph. 5:3-5; Col. 3:8) Obviously, certain words are more offensive than others. Profanity is any kind of language that profanes. However, obscene speech involves sexually explicit, filthy expressions. (g03 6/8 p. 19-20; w83 2/1 p. 4) Is the speech sexually explicit? Does it persist despite repeated counsel? This would include obscenities used both in written and in oral communication, such as Internet chat rooms, phone sex, or e-mail.

30. Greed​—gambling, extortion: (1 Cor. 5:10, 11; 6:10; 1 Tim. 3:8; it-1 pp. 789, 1005-1006; w89 1/15 p. 22) Christians should avoid gambling in all its various forms, including lotteries. (Isa. 65:11; g02 7/22 pp. 4-8; w89 7/15 p. 30; g82 7/8 pp. 25-27; g81 11/22 p. 27) If a person makes a practice of gambling and after repeated counsel unrepentantly pursues a course of greediness, judicial action would be appropriate.​—w80 9/1 pp. 29-30; w67 p. 356.

31. An individual continuing in employment directly involved with gambling or employment making him a clear accomplice or promoter of gambling would be subject to judicial action, usually after being allowed time, perhaps up to six months, to make the needed adjustments. (w95 5/15 p. 23 par. 11; km 9/76 pp. 3-6) In questionable cases it is best to consult with the branch office.

32. If a business gives out prizes or prize money to winners of a contest or to potential customers for advertising, accepting the gift is an individual’s decision to make. However, a person needs to be careful that accepting such a prize does not stir up greed. (Rom. 14:21; 1 Cor. 10:31-33; g75 7/8 p. 28; w73 p. 127) The elders do well not to involve themselves in what individuals do with regard to petty gambling solely for entertainment. They may need to give counsel if this becomes a cause of stumbling for others or affects the spirituality of the individual or the congregation.​—w02 11/1 p. 31.

33. A Christian who greedily and unrepentantly extorts a high bride-price may be disfellowshipped from the congregation.​—1 Cor. 5:11, 13; 6:9, 10; Heb. 13:5; w98 9/15 pp. 24-25.

34. Adamant refusal to provide materially for one’s own family, leaving wife and children destitute when having the means to provide: (1 Tim. 5:8; w88 11/1 pp. 22-23; km 9/73 p. 8) Some of the factors the body of elders should consider before forming a judicial committee are:

• Does the Christian adamantly refuse to provide for his family, or is the failure to provide because of other factors, such as health or financial difficulties? Is he doing what he reasonably can do to provide necessities for the family?

• Has counsel been previously given, and has there been an opportunity for the person to respond?

• Does his wife have material resources affording a secure life so that the family is not destitute?

• If the family is destitute, is it because they have rejected the family head’s provisions by choosing to live apart from him?

• When a separation is involved, to what extent is the other mate responsible?

35. Fits of anger, violence: (Prov. 22:24, 25; Mal. 2:16; Gal. 5:20; g01 11/8 p. 12; g97 6/8 p. 20; fy p. 150; g93 2/8 p. 14) Judicial action would be warranted if an individual repeatedly and unrepentantly gave in to violent fits of anger despite counsel. In questionable cases it is best to contact the branch office.

36. If a Christian took up professional boxing and refused to stop despite repeated counsel, judicial action would be appropriate.​—w81 7/1 pp. 30-31.

37. Even though a Christian has been accused of wrongdoing serious enough to require judicial action, a judicial committee should not be formed unless the wrongdoing has been established. What kind of evidence is acceptable?

• Confession (admission of wrongdoing), either written or oral, may be accepted as conclusive proof without other corroborating evidence. (Josh. 7:19) There must be two witnesses to a confession, and the confession must be clear and unambiguous. For example, a statement from a married Christian that his mate is “Scripturally free” would not by itself be viewed as a clear confession of adultery.

• A guilty plea entered in court by a Christian as part of a plea bargain, perhaps on the advice of an attorney so as to avoid the possibility of a harsher sentence, would generally not in itself be viewed as an admission of guilt in the congregation.

• There must be two or three eyewitnesses, not just people repeating hearsay; no action can be taken if there is only one witness.​—Deut. 19:15; John 8:17.

• If there are two or three witnesses to the same kind of wrongdoing but each one is witness to a separate incident, the elders can consider their testimony. While such evidence is acceptable to establish guilt, it is preferable to have two witnesses to the same occurrence of wrongdoing.

• The testimony of youths may be considered; it is up to the elders to determine whether the testimony has the ring of truth.

• The testimony of unbelievers and disfellowshipped or disassociated ones may also be considered, but it must be weighed carefully.

38. If wrongdoing has not been established but serious questions have been raised, the body of elders should appoint two elders to investigate the matter promptly. For example, there may be just one witness. If so, it would be loving for the witness first to confront the accused and encourage him to take the initiative to approach the elders. The elders can then allow the accused a few days to approach them. (For the witness by himself to confront the accused may not be advisable in all cases​—for example, if the witness and the accused were involved in sexual immorality together or if the witness was a victim of incest or rape by the accused or is a child and the victim of sexual abuse. Or it may be that the witness is extremely timid.) Whether the witness approaches the accused or not, the two elders appointed should speak with the accused regarding the accusation.​—w97 8/15 p. 27.

39. If the accused denies the accusation, the investigating elders should try to arrange a meeting with him and the accuser together. (Note: If the accusation involves child sexual abuse and the victim is currently a minor, the elders should contact the branch office before arranging a meeting with the child and the alleged abuser.) If the accuser or the accused is unwilling to meet with the elders or if the accused continues to deny the accusation of a single witness and the wrongdoing is not established, the elders will leave matters in Jehovah’s hands. (Deut. 19:15-17; 1 Tim. 5:19, 24, 25; w95 11/1 pp. 28-29) The investigating elders should compose a record, sign it, put it in a sealed envelope, and place it in the congregation’s confidential file. Additional evidence may later come to light to establish matters.​—See January 6, 2017, letter to all bodies of elders for further direction on filing confidential material.

40. In deciding whether to form a judicial committee or not, the body of elders should consider the following:

• Does he still profess to be a Witness?

• Is he generally recognized as a Witness in the congregation or the community?

• Does his conduct continue to affect any other person, such as in some cases of adultery or child abuse?

• Does the person have a measure of contact or association with the congregation so that a leavening, or corrupting, influence exists?

• Is the person willing to meet with a committee, thus admitting accountability to the Christian congregation?

41. Depending upon length of inactivity and other factors suggested above, elders may determine to hold the matter in abeyance. In such a case, they would make a record of the person’s questionable conduct for the congregation file. When the individual again shows interest in returning to the congregation, they can clarify these matters.

42. If the sinful conduct is known only to believing family members and no congregation action has been taken, believing relatives will likely determine to curtail family association severely, viewing the relative as bad association.​—1 Cor. 15:33; w85 7/15 p. 19 par. 14.

43. Depending upon the circumstances, the situation may need to be handled by a judicial committee. But if the immorality or other serious wrongdoing occurred more than a few years ago and the individual is genuinely repentant and recognizes that he should have come forward immediately when he sinned, good counsel by elders may be sufficient.

44. The body of elders may appoint two elders to gather the facts. Thereafter, the body would determine whether a judicial committee is needed or not, taking into consideration answers to the following questions:

• Was the wrongdoing in the distant past?

• How widely known is the matter?

• Does the erring one show evidence of spiritual progress as opposed to evidence that progress is being hindered?

• Will counsel be sufficient to restore him, or will more be required for him to have a clean conscience?

• Are there works befitting repentance?

• Did he voluntarily confess, or did the matter come to light by other means?

• How will respect for the body of elders be affected in the congregation?

• If por·neiʹa was involved, has a confession been made to the innocent mate?

• To what degree have lives been affected or damaged by the wrongdoing? For example, does the matter involve child abuse or adultery?

45. If the individual is serving as a ministerial servant, elder, or pioneer, his qualifications should be examined. If the body of elders determines that he no longer qualifies, a report should be submitted to the branch office.​—See 3:19-21.

46. When dealing with wrongdoers, the elders should not raise questions about the validity of the individual’s baptism. If the individual raises the issue, the elders may refer him to the February 15, 2010, Watchtower, page 22. Further information on rebaptism can be found in the February 15, 1964, Watchtower, pages 123-126, and the March 1, 1960, Watchtower, pages 159-160. Rebaptism is a personal matter.

47. At times a wrongdoer will claim that his baptism is not valid and that he feels he is not accountable to a judicial committee because he secretly engaged in wrongdoing shortly before he was baptized. If the elders had been aware of his serious wrongdoing committed just before baptism, likely they would not have approved him for baptism. However, this does not necessarily mean that he did not make a valid dedication. Some individuals make a dedication long before the baptism; others have made a dedication shortly before. The elders are not in a position to read the heart and know for a certainty how Jehovah viewed the person at the time he was baptized. If the elders learn that a baptized individual secretly engaged in serious wrongdoing while he was an unbaptized publisher but the wrongdoing ceased before baptism, they should give counsel and encouragement. A judicial committee should not be formed for prebaptism wrongdoing. (1 Cor. 6:9-11) However, if the individual resumed serious wrongdoing after baptism, the elders would generally deal with him on the basis of what he has professed to be, a dedicated and baptized Christian, and would meet with him judicially. Thereafter, if he feels he should be rebaptized, this would be a personal decision. However, a person should not get rebaptized simply because he gains improved understanding or appreciation of the truth or some Scriptural doctrine.​—Prov. 4:18.

48. There are rare occasions when it is obvious that the baptism was invalid because serious wrongdoing did not cease before baptism, even for a brief period of time. For example, it may be that at the time of baptism, the individual was living immorally with a member of the opposite or the same sex, was a member of a non-neutral organization, or something similar. If there are questions, the branch office should be consulted.

49. Bodies of elders should cooperate if there is a question regarding which congregation should handle a case of wrongdoing. Which congregation has the facts? Which congregation can handle the case most effectively? Jurisdiction should not become an issue.

50. If a wrongdoer moves before a case has been concluded, it is usually best for the elders of the original congregation to follow through if possible and if distance permits. They are acquainted with the person and his circumstances. If he has moved a great distance away, the brothers of the original congregation should not insist on handling matters if the wrongdoer says he is unable to return to the congregation for the hearing. In such a case, it may be advisable to refer matters to the elders of the congregation where he now lives. There should be good communication between the two bodies.

51. If the elders learn that a publisher who is visiting the area for a short period of time is guilty of wrongdoing, they should promptly report the matter to the elders of his congregation.

52. If a member of a congregation confesses to wrongdoing that involves a person in another congregation, the elders should promptly pass along what they know to the elders of the other congregation and allow them time to investigate. Does the other individual admit the wrong? Do their accounts match, or are there significant differences? The judicial committees should communicate freely and cooperate in obtaining the facts. There are many advantages to interviewing individuals jointly to ascertain what actually occurred and to clarify discrepancies. (Prov. 18:13, 17) If a joint hearing is held, thereafter the judicial committee of each congregation will withdraw and handle the case of the person from its own congregation. The judicial committee in one congregation should generally not conclude its case before the elders of the other congregation have fully investigated the situation.

53. The elders should promptly handle a case of serious wrongdoing by an unbaptized publisher. While a judicial committee would not be formed, the elders should select two elders to meet with him, perhaps the ones who approved him as an unbaptized publisher. They should try to readjust him and to determine whether he continues to qualify.​—od pp. 157-158; w88 11/15 pp. 17-20.

54. The assigned elders may determine to place certain restrictions on the individual for a time, including not commenting at meetings, giving talks on the Theocratic Ministry School, or sharing in the public ministry.

55. If the wrongdoing is widely known or might become widely known later and the wrongdoer is repentant, the two elders should inform the service committee, who will arrange for the following announcement to be made during the Service Meeting: “A matter involving [name of person] has been handled, and he [she] continues to serve as an unbaptized publisher with the congregation.”

56. There may be reasons for the body of elders to determine that a Scriptural talk about the sort of wrongdoing involved should be given to the congregation a few weeks after the announcement.

57. If the unbaptized publisher does not respond to the elders’ assistance, thus displaying an unrepentant attitude, the two elders should inform him that he no longer qualifies as an unbaptized publisher. Or if he informs the elders that he no longer desires to be a publisher, they will accept his decision. In either case, the elders will have the following announcement made during the Service Meeting: “[Name of person] is no longer recognized as an unbaptized publisher.” Because of his unrepentant wrongdoing, it would be best for a time not to call on him if he raises his hand to comment at meetings.

58. If the elders see that such a person is a threat to the flock, they can privately warn those endangered. For example, despite the announcement, the wrongdoer might attempt to socialize with youths in the congregation. In that situation, the elders would speak privately to the parents of the endangered ones and maybe to those youths also.

59. There is no specific arrangement for an appeal or a seven-day waiting period before announcing the decision that one is no longer recognized as an unbaptized publisher. If he expresses dissatisfaction with the conclusion, the body of elders should choose two different elders to review the case.

60. If someone who was previously removed as an unbaptized publisher begins to make progress and wishes once again to share in the ministry, two elders (perhaps those who met with him earlier) should meet with him to determine his qualifications. If he qualifies, an announcement should be made that he is an unbaptized publisher. There is no need to wait until he reports field service again to make the announcement.

61. If the unbaptized publisher is a minor by law, the two elders should first speak with the Christian parents to discern what occurred, the child’s attitude, and the corrective steps that the parents are taking. If the parents have the situation in hand, the two elders may choose not to meet with the minor but will check with the parents from time to time to offer helpful counsel, specific suggestions, and loving encouragement.

62. When an unbaptized publisher is involved in wrongdoing, the two elders assigned to meet with him should prepare a written record of the case. The secretary files this record in the same manner as he files judicial cases.​—See January 6, 2017, letter to all bodies of elders for further direction on filing confidential material.