I see.
That means the president of the agency would have been informed that the code of conduct wasn't necessarily suitable and, most importantly, lacked so much clarity that employees didn't know what they were supposed to do or how to follow the guidance. In some cases, the guidance merely comes down to common sense, although I'm less partial to that expression these days. As you rightly pointed out, investigations have to be conducted clearly and fairly.
You've seen cases of perceived misconduct and cases where the investigation didn't necessarily focus on the right thing. Is that correct?