Bridge prides itself with having an  exemplary document detailing the laws & ethics of the game.

Regardless of this there are numerous issues that still need attention. Not wishing to go too deeply into these matters i'm listing just two here:

12-14 NT.

I observe a growing tendency to include full 15 counts in a declared ACOL 12-14. I consider this  cheating. It can cause unexpected problems when making overcalls as 1 point does disturb probabilites of defender's combined values substantially. I intend to call the director on this practice whenever it occurs and we are potentialy damaged. I will also be raising the matter with the EBU ethics committee too. I do accept genuine 15's that will in all probability play like a 14 count - e.g. No Ace or a flat 4333 hand.
It is not a necessarily valid defence to say it was 'downgraded'. I have observed cases of perfectly sound 15 point hands opened 1NT & suspect a regular habit to do so. Regularity also implies a regular partner will be aware of it too. Hence my decision to raise this to the attention of the director at each & every occasion and recommend this course of action to all players.
Naturally an exception is made for flat - 4333 - hands with 15HCP and little in way of supporting middle cards! as these hands are not worth their 15 and can be legitimately opened with 1NT. And simiarly 12 point hands like these should be passed unless 3rd in hand!

Waiting for a ruff.

I think there are cases when players attempt to signal there desire for a ruff by other means than the cards they play.
I have observed players holding on to a played card instead of placing it on the table and then closing it when the trick is closed.
Some unduly slowly close their card, while still others continue to hold finger(s) on their closed card when they wish for the continuation!
If its clear to me its surely clear to their partner too, even if they give much thought before giving the ruff.
This is a kind of 'hesitation' imparting information to their partner.
I will bring this potential cheating to the attention of the director when it occurs, requesting the banning of that return!

Asking meaning of an opponents bid out of turn.

Clearly aimed at influencing partner possibly suggesting his partner should ask. In these cases i do not respond as bridge rules do not require me to do so. But what do I do when the his partner now asks me the meaning of his partner's bid? Can i now refuse?
In Bridgebase on-line system the bidder must alert any conventional bid BELOW 3N. and the alerter is required to ask for information about it. Unfortunately the Bridgebase software does NOT block the player who does not have his turn to bid and worse still I cannot tell who is asking! Of course my response is visible to both opponets correctly and not my partner. Bridgebase needs to seriously take notice of this ethical lapse.