We could examine what has been suggested to us by some people. The Federation of Law Societies of Canada, in order to solve these problems, has suggested that the amicus curiae be only allowed to contact the detained person's lawyer, so that the aforementioned person could feel perfectly confident to tell anything necessary to his or her lawyer, and the amicus curiae could thereafter receive his instructions from that other lawyer. I don't know whether you have examined this suggestion, but I have found it really original. If it was implemented, the detained person could be completely open to his or her lawyer.
I see that you are still waiting for our suggestions in this regard and that it is not because the case is before the Supreme Court that Parliament will be prevented from improving the legislation.
We have already discussed the type of custody that is being imposed on people who have not been found guilty of anything. When I saw the previous government decide, even before we had made any suggestion to them, to open a special prison to detain these persons, I thought they had understood the kind of suggestions that we were about to make. But I must say that we never expected that, by opening a special prison, they would make the custody of these persons who are not accused of anything and who are presumed innocent harsher than that of the people who are accused of ordinary law crime.
Do you intend to see to it that these prisons are compliant? I would suggest a test that appears in the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms of Quebec, that is that these persons must be treated in accordance with their status as being presumed innocent, since in this case, they are not being accused of anything.