All right. I'm putting it to you that all three of those failed. The Afghan authorities did not conduct themselves properly; the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission was not given access to the prisons, and they indicated that; and the International Committee of the Red Cross did not report to Canada, but to the Afghan authorities. That procedure actually failed, and as you indicated, it had to be changed.
I'm not blaming you for this, Mr. Buchan, but the worry I have is that the defence seems to be that there were no “credible” allegations--I use that word, and it's an adjective that's always used by the government in the defence of the situation--that Canadian-transferred detainees--and that's another adjective that's always used--were being tortured. However, the other evidence from Ms. Olexiuk, from Mr. Colvin, and from others was that everybody knew that prisoners were tortured in Afghanistan. “That's what they do”, said Mr. Colvin. Everybody seemed to know, and I'm sure you did too, that this was the story about Afghan detainees.
What I want to know is why it took a reporter from The Globe and Mail going to Afghanistan, doing his own investigation, taking whatever risks he had to take--the same ones, I suppose, that we would have to take to monitor this--to come up with the story that caused the government to act. That's the reality, isn't it?