This Advisory Opinion concerns the following issue as formulated from facts and/or circumstances furnished by a requestor. The opinion is based solely on the facts and circumstances as stated below and was approved by the Commission on May 5, 1995.

Are the Mississippi Ethics in Government laws violated should the sheriff's niece write bail bonds for the county which the sheriff serves?

          Your opinion request to the Office of the Attorney General dated March 23, 1995, was referred by that Office to the Mississippi Ethics Commission on April 18, 1995, as your request involves an issue that concerns the Mississippi conflicts of interest laws.

          The Mississippi Ethics Commission is restricted to interpreting and issuing opinions on Sections 25-4-101 through 25-4-119, 1972 Mississippi Code Annotated and Article IV, Section 109, Mississippi Constitution of 1890. Therefore, Mississippi laws outside the jurisdiction of the Commission and internal rules and regulations of the local governmental entity are not addressed by this opinion.

          Pertinent facts and circumstances provided by the requestor, absent identifying data, are set forth as follows and considered part of this opinion.

This is to request an Official Opinion from your office regarding the legality of a relative of the Sheriff being a bail bondsman.

My niece is a licensed bondsman, doing business as a bail bonding company, in the county. I would like to know if there is any conflict of interest or questionable legality in her conducting this business in the county in which I am Sheriff

The pertinent conflicts of interest laws to be considered here are:

Code Section 25-4-103(m) and (q) states:

"(m) 'Person' means any individual, firm, business, corporation, association, partnership, union or other legal entity, and where appropriate a governmental entity. (q) 'Relative' means the spouse, child or parent."

Code Section 25-4-105(5) states:

"(5) No person may intentionally use or disclose information gained in the course of or by reason of his official position or employment as a public servant in any way that could result in pecuniary benefit for himself, any relative, or any other person, if the information has not been communicated to the public or is not public information."

          The Commission formally adopts Advisory Opinion No. 90-020-E and by attachment incorporates it into this opinion.

         The Commission finds that a niece, just as the nephew and the first cousin in the attached opinions, is not a relative for purposes of the conflicts of interest laws.

          Notwithstanding the above, the requestor is advised to be especially mindful of the above cited Code Section 25-4-105(5). This section prohibits the sheriff, as a public servant, from intentionally using or disclosing non-public information gained as a public servant that could result in a pecuniary benefit for any person. A person as defined above would include a niece, even though a niece is not a relative for purposes of the conflicts of interest laws.

Ronald E.Crowe Executive Director