Mr. Chairman, I don't have specific information as to the frequency of persons getting themselves off the list through appeals or this sort of thing. You gave a scenario of perhaps the committee receiving evidence. I'm not so sure that it's an evidentiary-based process. I say that I'm not so sure. I'm not an expert in this area. Perhaps officials who are experts could advise you on this.
The UN, in my view, often works based on member states' wishes as opposed to evidentiary due process. I'm not so sure that it isn't the case that a member state could say, regarding Mr. X or Mr. Abdelrazik, “No, don't take him off.” And that word is enough and he doesn't get off, and no reasons are given. I'm not so sure that the UN calls upon its member states to justify their positions, but rather says, “What is your position? What do you invoke? It's national security? End of story, he's on the list.”
I don't know that for sure. I'm telling you that it is my suspicion that this is the way it works. I don't know that you ought to assume that it's an evidentiary process in which due consideration has been given to the fact that there's no evidence against the man. It may be that it's not a weighty consideration. It may be noted, but I'm not so sure that it's a decisive consideration.