Rule 8.3.Reporting Professional Misconduct 
 (a)A lawyer having knowledge that another lawyer has committed 
 a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a 
 substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or 
 fitness as a lawyer in other respects shall inform the appropriate 
 professional authority. 
  
 (b)A lawyer having knowledge that a judge has committed a 
 violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct that raises a 
 substantial question as to the judge's fitness for office shall inform 
 the appropriate authority. 
  
 (c)This Rule does not require disclosure of information 
 otherwise protected by Rule 1.6 or information gained by a lawyer or 
 judge while serving as a member of an approved lawyers'  assistance 
 program to the extent that such information would be confidential if it 
 were communicated subject to the attorney-client privilege. 
  
 

                                                                
ANNOTATIONSCOMMENT 
 Self-regulation of the legal profession requires that members of 
 the profession initiate disciplinary investigation when they know of a 
 violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct.  Lawyers have a similar 
 obligation with respect to judicial misconduct.  An apparently isolated 
 violation may indicate a pattern of misconduct that only a disciplinary 
 investigation can uncover.  Reporting a violation is especially 
 important where the victim is unlikely to discover the offense. 
  
 A report about misconduct is not required where it would involve 
 violation of Rule 1.6.  However, a lawyer should encourage a client to 
 consent to disclosure where prosecution would not substantially 
 prejudice the client's interests. 
  
 If a lawyer were obliged to report every violation of the Rules, 
 the failure to report any violation would itself be a professional 
 offense.  Such a requirement existed in many jurisdictions but proved to 
 be unenforcable.  This Rule limits the reporting obligation to those 
 offenses that a self-regulating profession must vigorously endeavor to 
 prevent.  A measure of judgment is, therefore, required in complying 
 with the provisions of this Rule.  The term "substantial" refers to the 
 seriousness of the possible offense and not the quantum of evidence of 
 which the lawyer is aware.  A report should be made to the bar 
 disciplinary agency unless some other agency, such as a peer review 
 agency, is more appropriate in the circumstances.  Similar 
 considerations apply to the reporting of judicial misconduct. 
  
 The duty to report professional misconduct does not apply to a 
 lawyer retained to represent a lawyer whose professional conduct is in 
 question.  Such a situation is governed by the rules applicable to the 
 client-lawyer relationship. 
  
 Information about a lawyer's or judge's misconduct or fitness may 
 be received by a lawyer in the course of that lawyer's participation in 
 an approved lawyers' or judges' assistance program.  In that 
 circumstance, providing for the confidentiality of such information 
 encourages lawyers and judges to seek treatment through such programs. 
 Conversely,  without such confidentiality, lawyers and judges may 
 hesitate to seek assistance from these programs, which may then result 
 in additional harm to their professional careers and additional injury 
 to the welfare of clients and the public.  The Rule therefore exempts 
 the lawyer from the reporting requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) 
 with respect to information that would be privileged if the relationship 
 between the impaired lawyer or judge and the recipient of the 
 information were that of a client and a lawyer.  On the other hand, a 
 lawyer who receives such information would nevertheless be required to 
 comply with the Rule 8.3 reporting provisions to report misconduct if 
 the impaired lawyer or judge indicates an intent to engage in illegal 
 activity, for example, the conversion of client funds to his or her use. 
  
 COMMITTEE COMMENT 
 In recommending this rule, the Committee adopted the definition of 
 knowledge contained in Restatement of Restitution,  10, Comment 
 (d)(1937), similarly adopted in Colorado Bar Association Ethics 
 Committee Opinion 64 (April 23, 1983)  "Knowledge means no substantial 
 doubt."