Thank you.
Mr. Matas, I think you spoke about revocation mostly in your presentation. My question is with respect to proposed subsection 10(2), the changes that are in the new legislation with respect to revocation of citizenship for an individual who may have committed a crime of terrorism or treason in another country where they were charged in another country for such acts and they could have their Canadian citizenship revoked. It's very clearly articulated that it could be whether it was before or after this person was granted Canadian citizenship that they committed this and were charged in another country. I can rhyme off at least five countries off the top of my head whose judicial system I don't trust as a Canadian. How does it make sense that, in our law, we are putting into writing that we are essentially trusting that every other country in the world has a fair and free judicial system that is impartial from any type of influence? I know you're a lawyer. That's why I'm asking you this. Does this make sense? Is this what we should be doing? Then is it now up to bureaucrats to actually make that assessment of whether that other country's legal system is fair and whether we should accept it?