RE the language: Folding when facing a check, or folding out of turn, are binding and considered highly unethical. Offenders will be penalized.
To keep such language MOL 100% consistent w/ the rule as adopted, you'd have something like this:
"Anytime before the end of the last betting round of a hand... folding when facing a check, or folding out of turn are binding,... unethical and may be subject to penalty."
Is it the line "in turn" that you're concerned with? While that could be removed, and leave essentially the same meaning, the whole purpose of this Rule 45 is to clarify ruling in the event of a non-standard (or irregular) fold. The two situations the rule was intended specifically to address are: a) folding when it's your proper turn to act and you're not facing a bet; and b) folding out of turn.
As to the first situation, there is some history in poker management that (especially when dealing with a newbie player) ... when a player does something they don't have to do (in this case fold when they don't have to), the situation is brought to their attention and they are given a chance to change their action (in this case retract their fold).... the Rule 45 is intended to clarify that in general such folds should be binding in tournament poker... It can be proposed at the next Summit to remove the line "in turn", the membership would have to vote whether they think the line clarifies what is intended or confuses it.
While on this subject, the language "folding when not facing a bet" might also be considered, instead of "folding when facing a check"... b/c the first player to act in a betting round might also inexplicably fold and technically he's not facing a check made by a preceeding player (although the rule is intended to apply in that situation)...
on the other hand "when not facing a bet" should not be construed to include during the showdown....
Also, is some language to the effect that "such folds are a form of soft play and may be subject to penalty" worth considering?... more food for thought.