Skip to content
A tall fluted stone civic facade photographed straight on in flat overcast light

Institutional access, properly conducted

Structured engagement with ministries, authorities and regulators — requested through official channels, conducted on the record, and documented from the first meeting onwards.

We do not sell proximity. We prepare a proposal to be understood.

Government relations, as this firm practises it, is administrative work before it is anything else. It means establishing which public body holds which decision, preparing material to the standard that body actually works to, requesting meetings through official channels in the client’s name, and keeping a written record of what was discussed and what was undertaken on both sides.

It is not lobbying for hire and it is not access brokering. The value we add is not that we know someone. It is that a serious proposal reaches the institution empowered to act on it, in a form it can evaluate, at a point in the cycle when it can be considered — and that the institution knows precisely who stands behind it.

Conducted this way, engagement is also a form of protection. Every meeting has a record. Every commitment has a date and an owner. If a decision is questioned years later by a regulator, a lender, an auditor or an incoming administration, the file answers the question.


The failure mode is not refusal. It is silence.

A proposal that arrives cold at a public body is rarely rejected outright. It is set aside pending a clarification nobody has been assigned to seek. Months pass, the sponsor reads the silence as resistance, and the temptation to find an unofficial route begins.

The right proposal at the wrong body

Responsibility for a single project is frequently divided between a line ministry, an implementing agency, an investment or zone authority and a sector regulator. A submission addressed to the wrong one is not refused. It is forwarded, and it loses its sponsor in transit.

The right body at the wrong moment

Institutions work to planning cycles, budget cycles and procurement calendars. A proposal that arrives after the window it depends on has closed will be considered, but not for another cycle, and the delay is usually read as resistance.

No institutional memory

Officials rotate. Where an engagement exists only in the recollection of the people who attended, a transfer resets the project to zero and the sponsor is asked to explain from the beginning what was agreed two years earlier.

Informal intermediation

When formal channels appear slow, sponsors are offered unofficial ones. Engagement conducted off the record, through undisclosed intermediaries, creates criminal and regulatory exposure for the investor, exposure for the official, and a project foundation that cannot survive scrutiny.

The last of these is the one that ends projects rather than delaying them. An engagement conducted off the record cannot be defended to a lender, an auditor, a prosecuting authority or a successor government. Doing this properly is not a constraint on the work. It is the work.


Six pieces of work, in sequence.

  1. 01

    Institutional mapping

    Before any approach is made we establish who actually decides. That means separating the body with statutory authority from the body with operational responsibility and from the body whose concurrence is required, identifying the level at which the decision is taken, and understanding the order in which those institutions expect to hear about a proposal. The map is written down and shared with the client, because it also determines the approvals sequence and the negotiating position.

  2. 02

    Position and briefing material

    Public institutions evaluate proposals against public objectives — capacity, employment, foreign exchange, service quality, fiscal exposure, environmental and social impact. We prepare briefing material that addresses those objectives directly and in the format the institution works to, with the commercial case intact but not leading. Material is factual, sourced, and written so that an official can circulate it internally without having to rewrite it first.

  3. 03

    Formal introduction and meeting requests

    Meetings are requested in writing through official channels, in the client’s name, identifying who will attend and what will be discussed. The client is named to the institution in every case. We do not carry proposals for principals who will not be identified, and we do not seek access through personal routes that bypass the institution’s own process.

  4. 04

    Engagement, conducted and recorded

    We attend alongside the client rather than instead of them, because the relationship being built belongs to the client. Every meeting produces a written record: date, institution, attendees, subject, questions raised, undertakings given on either side, and next steps. That record goes to the client, informs the follow-up correspondence, and is retained under the firm’s records policy.

  5. 05

    Consultation, feedback and revision

    The purpose of early engagement is to hear objections while the proposal can still change. Where an authority raises a concern — fiscal treatment, land, tariff structure, local content, environmental impact — we bring it back to the client as stated rather than softened, and support the revision. A proposal that has visibly absorbed institutional feedback is materially easier to approve than one presented as final.

  6. 06

    Continuity and commitment tracking

    Every undertaking given to an institution, and every undertaking given by one, is entered in a register with the date, the source and the person responsible. When personnel change on either side, the register is the briefing document. Engagement continues after approval, because the conditions attached to a decision are usually administered by the same body that granted it.


Stated plainly, because in this capability it matters most.

Fratres does not make facilitation payments. It does not make political contributions, in cash or in kind, in any jurisdiction. It does not offer, promise, give, request or accept anything of value in order to influence a decision, and it does not engage third parties to do so on its behalf.

Every meeting is requested through an official channel and recorded. Hospitality is modest, business-related, offered openly and logged. Fees are agreed in writing before work begins, are payable by the client alone, and no part of a fee is contingent on the decision of a public official or authority. The firm receives no payment from any public body.

These are contractual terms of every mandate rather than statements of intent. They are set out in full in the Anti-Bribery and Anti-Corruption Policy, and the wider standards that govern the firm are published under governance and integrity.

On the record

Meetings are requested formally and minuted. There is no category of engagement this firm conducts that it would be unwilling to describe to a regulator.

Named principals

The client is identified to the institution in every approach. We do not front for undisclosed parties.

No intermediaries

We do not appoint sub-agents, fixers or introducers to conduct engagement on our behalf, and we do not accept mandates that require us to work behind one.

Conflicts declared

Existing mandates that touch the same institution or the same competitive process are disclosed before an engagement is accepted, and declined where the conflict cannot be managed.

A file, not an impression.

The output of this capability is documentary. It is what allows a project to be explained to a lender, an auditor or a successor administration years after the meetings took place.
  • Institutional map

    Which bodies hold which decision, at what level, in what order, and what each of them is accountable for. Written, dated and revised as responsibilities move.

  • Engagement plan

    The sequence of approaches, the objective of each, the material required, and the timing relative to the planning and budget cycles the project depends on.

  • Briefing packs

    Institution-ready documents addressing public objectives directly, with sources shown, prepared for internal circulation rather than for presentation only.

  • Records of engagement

    A written record of every meeting held and every submission made — date, institution, attendees, subject and outcome — retained and available to the client at any time.

  • Commitments register

    What the client has undertaken to do, what has been indicated in return, and what remains outstanding. The document that survives a change of personnel on either side.

  • Periodic reporting

    Regular written reporting to the client on engagement status, institutional feedback received, and any change in position that affects the project timetable.


What this capability does not include.

These limits are absolute. They are not negotiated at the point of engagement and they are not waived for any mandate.

No political activity

The firm makes no political contributions in cash or in kind, in any jurisdiction. It does not work for political parties or candidates, does not provide campaign services, and does not engage in election-related activity of any description.

No anonymous representation

We will not make representations on behalf of a principal whose identity is withheld from the institution being addressed. If a client is unwilling to be named, we decline the mandate.

No guarantee of outcome

We commit to the quality, timing and conduct of an engagement. No adviser can commit to the decision of a sovereign authority, and any adviser who does should be treated with suspicion.

Not legal representation

We do not act as legal counsel, do not appear in proceedings before any tribunal or adjudicative body, and do not conduct arbitration or litigation on behalf of clients.

Engagement, on the record

If a project depends on a public decision, the conversation is worth having before the first approach is made rather than after it has stalled. Enquiries are reviewed by the partnership and answered directly.

Make an enquiry